I received an automated reply from Brian's mailbox saying that email address is no longer valid (the one on his contact info) and has been forwarded to another. No response yet.
In my thinking about this, I have also rejected the possibility that it is a Rockwell Test Mark on the die. To be a rockwell test on a die (which would be expected with a raised area), the shape should be sphero-conical with sloping sides of 120⁰. If it ever was that shape, it has of course been destroyed by the damage to the coin. However, I think that a test mark with damage would not resemble this feature at all when the shape before damage is considered. It is also too close to the edge of the coin (i.e. die) to be a Rockwell Test because of the following testing protocol I quoted in a paper I wrote on the subject: “Because of the relatively small volume of material affected by the hardness test, care must be taken to obtain representative test data. Several measurements should be taken to avoid a false reading caused by microstructural inconsistencies such as hard beryllide particles or grain boundaries. Hardness should be checked on cross sections when nonuniform cold work causes high surface hardness. The depth of penetration of the indenter must be less than 10% of the metal thickness, and the reading must be taken at least two indenter diameters from an edge. (Materion Corporation, 9/4/2015)."
Well I did hear from Brian and this is what he says: " I don’t attribute these types of possible errors. Your best bet would be to send it to one of the grading companies...PCGS, NGC or ANACS." I am not convinced any of these TPGs would even attempt to attribute the coin, but if anyone thinks differently, please advise (which one)!
You will need a reputable numismatist to authenticate the coin, providing that it left the mint this way. Then and only then will ANACS/ICG put it on the Label. Does anyone know what Pcgs and NGC do?