Final report

3.16 
REFERENCES 
̄ CHAPTER 3 
̄ 
1.   The WVA Coin Design Handbook, European Vending Association, Brussels, Belgium, 
Version 1.01, September 2007. 
2.  
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1257/ofr2007-1257v1.1.pdf
, John F. Papp, Lisa A. Corathers, 
Daniel L. Edelstein, Michael D. Fenton, Peter H. Kuck and Michael J. Magyar, “Cr, Cu, 
Mn, Mo, Ni, and Steel Commodity Price Influences,” Version 1.1, Open-File Report 
2007-1257. 
3.  
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2012/mcs2012.pdf
, “Mineral Commodity 
Summaries 2012,” January 24, 2012. 
4.  
http://alaskacanadarail.com/documents/WPA2/A2a%20Final%20draft%20YukonDB_RM 
G_Dec_20.pdf
, “Long Term Metal Prices and Factors Affecting Them,” for Alaska-
Canada Rail Link, by Raw Materials Group, October 2006. 
5.  
http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page36?oid=117978&sn=Detail&p 
id=102055
, Simon Hunt, “The Likely Pattern for Copper Prices in 2011 and Beyond,” 
posted January 07, 2011. 
6.  
http://www.intierra.com/Libraries/Brochures_and_Flyers/Intierra_Media_Release_­
_Copper_Price_to_Plateau_and_then_Soften.sflb.ashx
, “Copper Price to Plateau and then 
Soften,” Intierra Resource Intelligence, Media Release, August 22, 2011. 
7.  
http://www.miningweekly.com/article/nickel-price-expected-to-increase-over-coming­
decades-analyst-2009-10-14
, Esmarie Swanepoel, “Long-Term Nickel Price ‘Turns the 
Corner’ – Analyst,” Creamer Media’s Mining Weekly.com, October 14, 2009. 
8.  
http://www.intexresources.com/_upl/6_-_market_&_marketing_-_february_2010.pdf
, 
“Mindoro Nickel Definitive Feasibility Study; Section 17:  Market and Marketing,” 
Revision P1, Report Number 11292-00-G0722, Aker Solutions, February 2010. 
9.   Chart Builder, InfoMine, Mining Intelligence & Technology, retrieved February 2012 
from 
www.infomine.com
. 
10. 
http://arabal-conference.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/6-Aluminium%E2%80%99s­
Future-Under-a-New-Power-Market-Paradigm-Raju-Daswani-Metal-Bulletin.pdf
, Raju 
Daswani, “Aluminium’s Future Under a New Power Market Paradigm,” November 2011. 
174  

11. Alternative Materials for One Cent Coinage, Department of the Treasury, December 1973. 
12. Alternative Materials for One-Cent Coinage, Department of the Treasury, April 1980. 
175  

3.17 
APPENDICES 
̄ CHAPTER 3 
3.17.1  Appendix 3-A:  Summar y Table of Wor ld Coin Compositions 
Table 3-A-1.  Metallic Composition of Selected Coins Throughout the World 
Country 
Lowest to Highest Value Coins within Given Country (KEY: 
low value
, 
medium value
, 
high value
) 
1 Cent 
2 Cent 
5 Cent 
10 Cent 
20 Cent 
50 Cent 
1 Dollar 
2 Dollar 
Australia 
Withdrawn 
Withdrawn 
75% Cu 
75% Cu 
75% Cu 
75% Cu 
92% Cu 
92% Cu 
from 
from 
25% Ni 
25% Ni 
25% Ni 
25% Ni 
6% Al 
6% Al 
circulation 
circulation 
2% Ni 
2% Ni 
1 Cent 
5 Cent 
10 Cent 
25 Cent 
50 Cent 
1 Dollar 
2 Dollar 
Production to 
94.5% steel 
92% steel 
94% steel 
93.15% steel 
91.5% Ni 
Ring:  99% 
Canada 
end in 2012 
3.5% Cu 
5.5% Cu 
3.8% Cu 
4.75% Cu 
7.5% Cu 
Ni; Center: 
2% Ni 
2.5% Ni 
2.2% Ni 
2.1% Ni 
1% Sn 
92% Cu 
6% Cu 
2% Ni 
China 
1 Jiao 
Aluminum 
1 Cent 
2 Cent 
5 Cent 
10 Cent 
20 Cent 
50 Cent 
1 Euro 
2 Euro 
Cu-plated 
Cu-plated 
Cu-plated steel 
89% Cu 
89% Cu 
89% Cu 
Ring:  Ni; 
Ring:  Cu-Ni; 
European 
steel 
steel 
5% Al 
5% Al 
5% Al 
Center:  Cu-
Center:  Ni-
Union 
5% Zn 
5% Zn 
5% Zn 
Ni; Ni and 
brass; Ni and Ni­
1% Sn 
1% Sn 
1% Sn 
Cu-Ni (3 
brass (3 layers) 
Great 
1 Penny 
2 Pence 
5 Pence 
10 Pence 
20 Pence 
50 Pence 
1 Pound 
2 Pound 
Cu-plated 
Cu-plated 
Ni-plated steel 
Ni-plated 
84% Cu 
75% Cu 
Ni-brass 
Ring:  Cu-Ni; 
Britain 
steel 
steel 
steel 
16% Ni 
25% Ni 
Center:  Ni-brass 
1 Yen 
5 Yen 
50 Yen 
100 Yen 
500 Yen 
Japan 
Aluminum 
65% Cu 
75% Cu 
75% Cu 
72% Cu 
35% Zn 
25% Ni 
25% Ni 
20% Zn 
8% Ni 
1 Won 
5 Won 
10 Won 
50 Won 
100 Won 
South 
Withdrawn 
Withdrawn 
65% Cu 
70% Cu 
75% Cu 
Korea 
from 
from 
35% Zn 
18% Zn 
25% Ni 
circulation 
circulation 
12% Ni 
5 Centavo 
10 Centavo 
20 Centavo 
50 Centavo 
1 Peso 
2 Peso 
5 Peso 
10 Peso 
20 Peso 
50 Peso 
Stainless 
Stainless steel 
Stainless steel 
Stainless 
Ring: 
Ring: 
Ring: 
Ring:  Al-bronze; 
Ring:  Al-
Ring:  Al-bronze; 
Mexico 
steel 
steel 
stainless 
stainless 
stainless steel; 
Center:  65% Cu 
bronze; Center: 
Center:  92.5% Ag 
steel; Center: 
steel; Center: 
Center:  Al-
25% Zn 10% Ni 
92.5% Ag 7.5% 
7.5% Cu 
Al-bronze 
Al-bronze 
bronze 
Cu 
1 Kopeck 
5 Kopeck 
10 Kopeck 
50 Kopeck 
1 Ruble 
2 Ruble 
5 Ruble 
10 Ruble 
Russia 
Cupronickel 
Cupronickel 
Brass-plated 
Brass-
Ni-plated 
Ni-plated 
Ni-plated steel 
Brass-plated steel 
steel 
plated steel 
steel 
steel 
1 Cent 
5 Cent 
10 Cent 
25 Cent 
50 Cent 
1 Dollar 
United 
97.5% Zn 
75% Cu 
91.67% Cu 
91.67% Cu 
91.67% Cu 
88.5% Cu 
2.5% Cu 
25% Ni 
8.33% Ni 
8.33% Ni 
8.33% Ni 
6% Zn 
States 
3.5% Mn 
2% Ni 
̄ 
layers) 
176  

3.17.2  Appendix 3-B:  Detailed Cost Summar y of Each Candidate Mater ial 
Table 3-B-3.  Cost Breakdown of Alternative Material Candidates for One-Cent Coin 
Weight 
(g) 
Metal + 
Fabrication 
+ USM 
Production 
– Scrap 
USM O/H + 
G&A + 
Distribution 
Total 
Unit 
Cost 
Savings vs. 
March 2012 
Cost for 
4289M Coins 
Savings vs. 
USM 
FY2011 
4289M Coins 
March 
2012 
Metal 
Cost 
Supplier 
Fabrication 
* 
Scrap 
Credit 
* 
USM 
Direct 
Production 
* 
2011 One-
Cent Coin 
2.50 
$0.0134 
$0.0107 
$0.0241 
-­
-­
$0.0069 
$0.0041 
a 
-­
c 
$0.0024 
a 
CPZ March 
2012 Costs 
2.50 
$0.0118 
$0.0107 
$0.0225 
-­
$6,896,712 
$0.0053 
$0.0041 
a 
-­
-­
$0.0024 
a 
CPS (P) 
2.82 
$0.0170 
$0.0107 
$0.0276 
$(21,961,855) 
$(15,099,455) 
$0.0061 
$0.0084 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0024 
a 
5052 Al (S) 
0.94 
$0.0074 
$0.0107 
$0.0180 
$19,193,065 
$26,055,465 
$0.0041 
b, 
d 
0.0008 
d, 
f 
$0.0041 
e 
430 
Stainless 
Steel 
2.74 
$0.0130 
$0.0107 
$0.0237 
$(5,196,342) 
$1,666,058 
$0.0085 
b, 
d 
0.0016 
d, 
f 
$0.0062 
g, 
h 
CPS (S) 
2.82 
$0.0146 
$0.0107 
$0.0253 
$(11,826,752) 
$(4,964,352) 
$0.0105 
b, 
d 
-­
-­
$0.0041 
e 
Aluminized 
Steel (S) 
2.74 
$0.0095 
$0.0107 
$0.0202 
$10,029,698 
$16,892,098 
$0.0054 
b, 
d 
-­
-­
$0.0041 
e 
Per coin costs for all materials include:  Plant overhead (O/H) = $0.0063, Distribution to Federal Reserve Banks (FRBs) = $0.0003, General and Administrative 
(G&A) = $0.0041 
* See Table 3-B-6 for details on each annotation listed here. 
177  

Table 3-B-4.  Cost Breakdown of Alternative Material Candidates for 5-Cent Coin 
Weight 
(g) 
Metal + 
Fabrication 
+ USM 
Production 
– Scrap  
USM O/H + 
G&A + 
Distribution 
Total 
Unit 
Cost 
Savings vs. 
March 2012 
Cost for 
914M Coins 
Savings vs. 
USM 
FY2011 
914M Coins 
March 
2012 
Metal 
Cost 
Supplier 
Fabrication 
* 
Scrap 
Credit 
* 
USM Direct 
Production 
* 
2011 5-Cent 
Coin 
5.00 
$0.0796 
$0.0322 
$0.1118 
-­
-­
$0.0674 
$0.0067 
a 
-­
c 
$0.0055 
a 
5-Cent 
March 2012 
Costs 
5.00 
$0.0674 
$0.0322 
$0.0995 
-­
$11,206,159 
$0.0569 
$0.0067 
a,j 
0.0018 
f,m 
$0.0055 
a 
G6 Mod (S) 
4.72 
$0.0499 
$0.0322 
$0.0821 
$15,942,757 
$27,184,957 
$0.0389 
$0.0067 
a,j 
0.0012 
f,m 
$0.0055 
a 
669z (S) 
4.79 
$0.0491 
$0.0322 
$0.0813 
$16,668,857 
$27,911,057 
$0.0380 
$0.0067 
a,j 
0.0012 
f,m 
$0.0055 
a 
Unplated 
31157 (S) 
4.58 
$0.0401 
$0.0322 
$0.0723 
$24,898,153 
$36,140,353 
$0.0287 
$0.0067 
a,j 
0.0009 
f,m 
$0.0055 
i 
Nickel-
Plated 
31157 (P) 
4.26 
$0.0673 
$0.0322 
$0.0995 
$36,560 
$11,278,760 
$0.0618 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0055 
i 
Dura-White-
Plated Zn 
(P) 
4.10 
$0.0226 
$0.0322 
$0.0547 
$40,910,640 
$52,152,840 
$0.0197 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0028 
i 
Multi-Ply-
Plated Steel 
(P) 
4.37 
$0.0312 
$0.0322 
$0.0634 
$32,995,400 
$44,237,600 
$0.0284 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0028 
i 
Nickel-
Plated Steel 
(P) 
4.40 
$0.0448 
$0.0322 
$0.0770 
$20,556,171 
$31,798,371 
$0.0420 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0028 
i 
CPZ (P) 
4.06 
$0.0199 
$0.0322 
$0.0520 
$43,378,440 
$54,620,640 
$0.0170 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0028 
i 
302 
Stainless 
Steel (S) 
4.40 
$0.0355 
$0.0322 
$0.0677 
$29,041,632 
$40,283,832 
$0.0350 
b,d 
0.006 
d,f,l, 
m 
$0.0066 
h 
430 
Stainless 
Steel (S) 
4.40 
$0.0163 
$0.0322 
$0.0485 
$46,590,679 
$57,832,879 
$0.0137 
d,j,l 
0.003 
d,f, 
m 
$0.0053 
h, 
k 
Per coin costs for all materials include:  Plant O/H = $0.0142, Distribution to FRB = $0.0004, G&A = $0.0176. 
* See Table 3-B-6 for details on each annotation listed here. 
178 

Table 3-B-5.  Cost Breakdown of Alternative Material Candidates for Dime Coin 
Weight 
(g) 
Metal + 
Fabrication 
+ USM 
Production 
– Scrap 
USM O/H + 
G&A + 
Distribution 
Total 
Unit 
Cost 
Savings vs. 
March 2012 
Cost for 
1403M Coins 
Savings vs. 
USM FY2011 
1403M Coins 
March 
2012 
Metal 
Cost 
Supplier 
Fabrication 
* 
Scrap 
Credit 
* 
USM Direct 
Production 
* 
2011 Dime 
Coin 
2.27 
$0.0357 
$0.0208 
$0.0565 
-­
-­
$0.0246 
$0.0065 
a 
-­
c 
$0.0046 
a 
Dime 
March 
2012 Costs 
2.27 
$0.0319 
$0.0208 
$0.0527 
-­
$5,271,219 
$0.0215 
$0.0065 
a 
0.0007 
f, 
m 
$0.0046 
a 
G6 Mod-
Clad Cu 
(S) 
2.22 
$0.0292 
$0.0208 
$0.0501 
$3,774,068 
$9,045,287 
$0.0187 
$0.0065 
a 
0.0006 
f, 
m 
$0.0046 
a 
669z-Clad 
Cu (S) 
2.23 
$0.0291 
$0.0208 
$0.0500 
$3,893,837 
$9,165,056 
$0.0186 
$0.0065 
a 
0.0006 
f, 
m 
$0.0046 
a 
Unplated 
31157-Clad 
Cu (S) 
2.20 
$0.0277 
$0.0208 
$0.0485 
$5,923,437 
$11,194,656 
$0.0171 
$0.0065 
a 
0.0005 
f, 
m 
$0.0046 
a 
Per coin costs for all materials include:  Plant O/H = $0.0117, Distribution to FRB = $0.0004, G&A = $0.0087. 
* See Table 3-B-6 for details on each annotation listed here. 
179  

Table 3-B-6.  Cost Breakdown of Alternative Material Candidates for Quarter Dollar Coin 
Weight 
(g) 
Metal + 
Fabrication 
+ USM 
Production 
– Scrap 
USM O/H + 
G&A + 
Distribution 
Total 
Unit 
Cost 
Savings vs. 
March 2012 
Cost for 
323M Coins 
Savings vs. 
USM FY2011 
323M Coins 
March 
2012 
Metal 
Cost 
Supplier 
Fabrication 
* 
Scrap 
Credit 
* 
USM 
Direct 
Production 
* 
2011 Quarter 
Dollar Coin 
5.67 
$0.0828 
$0.0286 
$0.1114 
-­
-­
$0.0629 
$0.0162 
a 
-­
c 
$0.0037 
a 
Quarter 
March 2012 
Costs 
5.67 
$0.0720 
$0.0286 
$0.1006 
-­
$3,486,062 
$0.0538 
$0.0162 
a 
0.0017 
f,m 
$0.0037 
a 
G6 Mod-Clad 
Cu (S) 
5.55 
$0.0653 
$0.0286 
$0.0939 
$2,172,174 
$5,658,236 
$0.0468 
$0.0162 
b,a 
0.0014 
f,m 
$0.0037 
a 
669z-Clad Cu 
(S) 
5.59 
$0.0651 
$0.0286 
$0.0937 
$2,241,107 
$5,727,170 
$0.0466 
$0.0162 
a 
0.0014 
f,m 
$0.0037 
a 
Unplated 
31157-Clad 
Cu (S) 
5.51 $0.0614 $0.0286 
$0.0901 
$3,409,248 
$6,895,311 
$0.0429 
$0.0162 
a 
0.0013 
f,m 
$0.0037 
-­
Nickel-Plated 
31157-Clad 
Cu (P) 
5.26 
$0.0774 
$0.0286 
$0.1060 
$(1,741,862) 
$1,744,200 
$0.0760 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0014 
n 
Nickel-Plated 
Steel (P) 
5.03 
$0.0521 
$0.0286 
$0.0807 
$6,415,847 
$9,901,910 
$0.0505 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0017 
n,h 
Multi-Ply-
Plated Steel 
(P) 
5.03 
$0.0434 
$0.0286 
$0.0720 
$9,240,138 
$12,726,200 
$0.0420 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0014 
n 
Dura-
White™­
Plated Zn (P) 
4.54 
$0.0393 
$0.0286 
$0.0679 
$10,564,438 
$14,050,500 
$0.0379 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0014 
n 
SS/Cu/SS (S) 
5.56 
$0.0584 
$0.0286 
$0.0870 
$4,380,423 
$7,866,485 
$0.0378 
$0.0162 
d,e, 
a 
-­
-­
$0.0044 
a,h 
Per coin costs for all materials include:  Plant O/H = $0.0095, Distribution to FRB = $0.0015, G&A = $0.0176. 
* See Table 3-B-6 for details on each annotation listed here. 
180  

Table 3-B-7.  Cost Breakdown of Alternative Material Candidates for Dollar Coin 
Weight 
(g) 
Metal + 
Fabrication 
+ USM 
Production 
– Scrap 
USM O/H + 
G&A + 
Distribution 
Total 
Unit 
Cost 
Savings vs. 
March 2012 
Cost for 
467M Coins 
Savings vs. 
USM FY2011 
467M Coins 
March 
2012 
Metal 
Cost 
Supplier 
Fabrication 
* 
Scrap 
Credit 
* 
USM 
Direct 
Production 
* 
2011 Dollar 
Coin 
8.10 
$0.1231 
$0.0572 
$0.1803 
-­
-­
$0.0751 
$0.0364 
a 
-­
c 
$0.0116 
a 
Dollar 
March 2012 
Costs 
8.10 
$0.1124 
$0.0572 
$0.1696 
-­
$5,018,535 
$0.0664 
$0.0364 
a 
0.002 
f,m 
$0.0116 
a 
C69250­
Clad Cu (S) 
7.91 
$0.1112 
$0.0572 
$0.1683 
$593,622 
$5,590,522 
$0.0651 
$0.0364 
b,a 
0.002 
f,m 
$0.0116 
a 
K474-Clad 
Cu (S) 
7.74 
$0.1078 
$0.0572 
$0.1650 
$2,154,460 
$7,151,360 $0.0617 
$0.0364 
b,a 
0.002 
f,m 
$0.0116 
a 
Yellow 
Bronze-
Plated Zn 
(P) 
8.46 
$0.1076 
$0.0572 
$0.1648 
$2,241,600 
$7,238,500 
$0.1010 
b 
-­
-­
$0.0066 
o 
Per coin costs for all materials include:  Plant O/H = $0.0300, Distribution to FRB = $0.0021, G&A = $0.0251. 
* See Table 3-B-6 for details on each annotation listed here. 
181  

Table 3-B-8.  Annotation Key for Cost Breakdown Tables 
Annotation 
Key 
a 
United States Mint FY2011 
b 
From lowest quote 
c 
Included in metal cost 
d 
x 1.21 (web-scrap factor) 
e 
= USM x 0.75 (B + U + strike) / 0.45 (strike only) 
f 
x 1.04 (condemned recovery) 
g 
= USM x 0.95 (B + U + A + strike) / 0.45 (strike only) 
h 
= USM x 1.2 to account for higher striking load, annealing temperature 
i 
= USM – 0.0027 (striking only) 
j 
From commodity metals cost (March 1, 2012) 
k 
= USM – 0.0011 (remove anneal) 
l 
Assumes supplier fabrication = 10% of supplier cost 
m 
x 0.77 scrap recovery 
n 
= USM – 0.0023 (striking only) 
o 
= USM – 0.005 (striking only) 
B = blanking costs; U = upsetting costs; USM = United States Mint coin costs; A = annealing costs. 
Table 3-B-9.  Commodity Metals Costs 
Commodity 
Cost 
Unit 
Source 
Cost Date 
Copper 
$3.8705 
lb 
Comex 
February 29, 2012 
Zinc 
$2,125.50 
MT 
LME 
February 29, 2012 
Nickel 
$19,910.00 
MT 
LME 
February 29, 2012 
Manganese 
$3,075.00 
ton 
Minerprices.com 
February 28, 2012 
Aluminum 
$2,288.00 
MT 
LME 
March 1, 2012 
Tin 
$23,875.00 
MT 
LME 
March 1, 2012 
IF Steel 
$600.00 
ton 
Carpenter 
Technology 
November 2011 
Aluminized Steel 
$0.75 
lb 
Ryerson 
November 2011 
430 Stainless Steel 
Cold Rolled 
$2,335.00 
MT 
MEPS NA 
August 2011 
lb = pound; MT = metric ton (tonne); LME = London Metal Exchange. 
182  

4.0   OUTREACH, VALIDATION OF ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL 
CANDIDATE NONSENSE PIECES AND SECURITY 
4.1  
INTRODUCTION 
Many of the metallic alternative material candidates researched, developed and/or tested in this 
study for the construction of United States (US) circulating coins will impact individuals and 
organizations (here referred to as “stakeholders”) that rely upon specific characteristics and/or 
properties of incumbent (i.e., in circulation as of the date of this report) US circulating coins for 
conducting commerce.  The impact includes conversion costs and preparation time required to 
upgrade existing automated equipment and operating practices reliant on incumbent coinage 
characteristics and properties.  Impacts to current coinage material suppliers (including recycling 
of scrap from the production of coins) are described in the Cost Trends Analysis Chapter.  This 
chapter is primarily focused on the stakeholders that rely on automated equipment whose 
function depends in large part on circulating coins; note that automated equipment may accept 
other forms of payment besides coins. 
To ensure compliance with the Coin Modernization, Oversight, and Continuity Act of 2010 
(Public Law 111-302), the project team completed a comprehensive evaluation to quantify the 
stakeholder impacts resulting from changes in the construction of US circulating coins.  These 
stakeholder impacts included: 
x  Equipment conversion costs 
x  Estimated time required to upgrade equipment 
x  Ease of use and ability to co-circulate new coins of alternative metallic material 
construction. 
Specific changes to US circulating coins that would impact stakeholders and coin security 
include: 
x  Coin material and construction method 
x  Coin dimensions (diameter and thickness), shape and rim height 
x  Edge profile (smooth vs. reeds) 
x  Inductive coin thickness (i.e., average thickness of coin material as measured by sensors 
that validate coins) 
x  Design embossing or relief height 
x  Density (manifested as a difference in coin weight when incumbent coin dimensions are 
maintained) 
x  Electrical/magnetic properties, which are exploited by sensors to validate and 
differentiate between coins via automated methods. 
General information was gathered from members and industry trade groups throughout each of 
several stakeholder groups, which included (but was not limited to) vending machine
80 
and other 
80 
As used here, vending machines include those devices that dispense a tangible product such as food, beverage, 
transit tickets or cigarettes.  Coin-operated machines that provide services, which include, but are not limited to, 
laundering clothes, entertainment, parking, car washing and pay phone calls, are treated separately from vending 
machines.  Note that the vending machine owners and operators, along with the laundromat owners and operators, 
183  

coin-acceptance equipment manufacturers, vending machine owners and operators, transit 
officials, municipal parking officials, depository institutions, coin and currency handlers, 
armored-car operators, car wash operators, American-owned manufacturers of commercial coin 
processing equipment and merchants [Reference:  Public Law 111-302, section 2(b)(3)].  The 
general information was then used to estimate the impact, if any, to each of the stakeholder 
groups as a result of introducing coins having different characteristics and/or properties from 
those of incumbent coins.  As discussed in this chapter and elsewhere in this report, alternative 
metallic materials were evaluated for potential use in future US circulating coins.  Depending 
upon the characteristics and properties of the specific metallic materials and denominations 
chosen, relative to incumbent US circulating coins, the extent and magnitude of the impact varies 
greatly to those stakeholders who rely upon coins to conduct commerce.  Specific details for 
each of the stakeholders are discussed below. 
As a point of clarification, as used throughout this chapter, the term “change” refers to 
differences that result in non-seamless coins, i.e., those coins having discernible deviations from 
incumbent coinage that would require an upgrade to current, fielded coin-acceptance and coin-
handling equipment to enable this equipment to correctly accept both incumbent and alternative 
material circulating coins.
81 
In other words, the term “change” in this chapter refers to a 
difference in some characteristic and/or property that would impact stakeholders such that it 
would require a response to correctly and consistently identify, differentiate, validate, accept (or 
not validate and reject) or otherwise handle coins minted from the alternative materials so that 
co-circulation of incumbent and new coins will be permitted.  As defined in this chapter, a 
change to coin dimensions refers to any alteration in the diameter and/or thickness of the coin 
that would disrupt the stakeholder group under discussion.  One other important point, the 
analyses below assume that any alternative material circulating coins would co-circulate with 
incumbent US circulating coins (as opposed to withdrawing from circulation or demonetizing all 
incumbent US circulating coins) to aid in US commerce. 
This chapter outlines the methods used to identify the nature of the impact, and quantifies both 
the financial impact (i.e., the conversion costs) and preparation time required by various 
stakeholder groups that would be impacted by changes in the construction of US circulating 
coins.  Estimates were made, based upon direct stakeholder feedback and information available 
in public forums 
82 
to define the magnitude of the impact to each of the stakeholder groups 
considered during this outreach effort. 
were found to represent the two most significantly impacted stakeholder groups (in terms of total financial impact) 
in the current study should coin characteristics and/or properties change.  
81 
Coin-acceptance equipment is that which rely upon validating, accepting and processing coins for further 
transactions (generally the delivery of a product or service).  Coin-handling equipment is that whose primary  
purpose is to mechanically process coins, typically in large quantities, for separating, counting, packaging,  
transporting, making change and/or similar actions.  Collectively, these two general classes of equipment are  
referred to in this document as “coin-processing” equipment.
82 
Public forums from which information was obtained include:  1) technical reports from trade group publications, 
professional organizations and the Government Accountability Office of the United States, 2) presentations made at 
gatherings sponsored by professional and trade groups, 3) publically available testimonies before the United States  
Congress and 4) data available from Internet sites.  
184  

The current chapter discusses: 
x  The numbers and types of coin-processing units potentially impacted within each of the 
stakeholder groups resulting from changes to US circulating coins 
x  Unique issues faced by individual stakeholder groups 
x  The approximate conversion costs to 1) upgrade coin-processing equipment and 2) adapt 
operational strategies to enable commerce with co-circulated coins of differing 
characteristics and/or properties. 
This is followed by a discussion of the impact of introducing into circulation coins produced 
from alternative material candidates, including seamless options, identified in the Introduction of 
the report.  The goal is to quantify the conversion costs to the greatest extent possible 
[Reference:  Public Law 111-302, section 3(d)].  The magnitude of the conversion costs required 
of all stakeholders is also summarized for each of the alternative material-denomination 
combinations evaluated in this study. 
Results are summarized and discussed from nonsense coin validation tests completed by three 
coin-processing equipment manufacturers on experimental nonsense pieces struck by the United 
States Mint.  Coin validation tests were completed to define which, if any nonsense pieces, could 
be validated seamlessly without changes to fielded coin-processing equipment, including (but not 
limited to) those used in vending, car washes, laundromats and other devices that allow for 
unattended points of sale or that sort, count and/or handle coins in some manner.  Finally, a 
summary of security issues is presented, both as they apply generally to coinage and specifically 
as they apply to the nonsense pieces defined and evaluated throughout this study.