Big Big Thanks to all who responded with suggestions. I know I went to the right group for an answer. small quantity of yeast into the bottles - The theory being that most, if not all, of the active yeast died or became too weak due to the extended conditioning in the secondary. This supports the fact that there is absolutely no sediment at the bottom of the bottles - an indication of yeast activity. As a background, the extended conditioning in the secondary was due to the fact that it is a "big" (high ABV) beer. Plus, I added extra DME to what was called for in the recipe. BTW, the bottles have been in a 76+F environment since they were filled. I have shaken them up a couple of times. The down side of adding yeast to the bottle - Beer Bombs!! Extra yeast will generate more CO2 and cause the caps to blow off and/or the bottles to explode. Another suggestion was to let it "bottle condition" for a few more months. Primarily because of the high ABV. This won't "hurt" the beer - it'll just make it better. The obvious solution is to carefully keg the beer avoiding oxygination. But then I will need a refrigerator for the keg to keep the beer cold (or go the jockey box route). I haven't decided which of the first two routes I'll take. Since sanitation is of high concern, I am tempted to continue bottle conditioning as it for another 3 to 6 months with repeated shakeups once a week (or once every two weeks). If that doesn't do the job, then add yeast to the bottles. Again, a Big Thanks to all for the recommendations! Regards, Dipak Tel: 612.562.8569 http://www.linkedin.com/in/djshah This transmission including all attachment(s) thereto are privileged and confidential, and intended only for the addressee(s) listed. If you are not explicitly listed as an addressee, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, and/or copying in any form is strictly prohibited. Accordingly, please immediately destroy this message including all attachment(s) thereto and all copy(ies) thereof in any form, and immediately notify the sender. On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Dipak J. Shah <dshah2k(a)gmail.com> wrote: