16 CFR Part 23; Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries: Public Roundtable; Project No. G711001 #00009 

Submission Number:
00009 
Commenter:
Giuseppe Dal Monte
Organization:
Richline Group
State:
California
Initiative Name:
16 CFR Part 23; Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries: Public Roundtable; Project No. G711001
I'm a SVP of Manufacturing of a Major US based company, Richline Group a Berkshire Hathaway Company. I totally agreed with the statements in the attached documents by Mr. Bell. Conforming The US marking of jewelry to those rules that are enforced in most Countries around the world is beneficial to the consumer, who will receive what it's expected, and also to the industry. We do manufacture goods for exports, to France and England and because of different standards we are forced to create two inventories for the different metal alloys. We do have the technology and means to maintain a karat of a jewelry being assembled with solder, there is no need to allow a lower gold content then the marking states; Think of ordering at a restaurant an expansive bottle of wine that states that its content is 750 ml but when the bottle is brought at the table the bottle is partially empty, would that be acceptable to the consumer even if "legal"? Sincerely, Giuseppe Dal Monte