Nope.
I don't get it either. I would call the coin a 65, but I said 64 since it's a woody. 63 makes no sense.
You'd think the mint could figure out a way to smoothly polish dies. Of course, you'd think the mint could figure out a lot of things.
Oftentimes with commemorative coins there are flaws in the design, or odd things end up just being a part of the design. Have you compared this to...
64RB.
I find my best doubled dies while, ah, "impaired." As for this one, probably a minor die gouge or die abrasion.
They are indeed all LMC reverses. What they aren't is DDR-001. I bet you were never any good at those "What's the difference between these two...
I'm not seeing any doubling on this coin, and it's certainly not DDR001.
It's a very minor lamination error. No premium.
I don't think they should be mandatory, but caveat emptor to anyone who buys without seeing the coin.
As for that '86D, it appears to have had the copper plating removed via electrolysis. These can be tough to distinguish from partially plated...
If you look at the top photograph of the OPs coin, you'll see it best at the top and right edges of the Memorial Building. The thin copper plating...
Here's a link that explains it a little further(notice that the top coin photographed is a '92D)- http://www.error-ref.com/split-peeling-plating/
Separate names with a comma.
