The following Letter Type A, or variations thereof, was submitted by individuals or entities.
Letter Type A:
Dear Ms. Murphy:
I am writing to urge you to institute strong rules on conflict minerals under Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this important issue.
I am concerned that mining of gold comes at a great cost to communities and the environment, particularly in areas of armed or militarized conflict like in the Democratic Republic of Congo. As a responsible consumer, I do not wish be complicit in this conflict through my purchases of jewelry, electronics, or other products containing gold. I want to be able to choose products that come with an independent guarantee that they are free of "Blood Gold."
Your draft rules on Conflict Minerals have the potential to help make that verification possible if the rules are stringent and comprehensive on several important points.
1) The rules must fully include gold and metals mining companies.
2) The rules must apply to all possible companies, and not exempt small, foreign, or other companies.
3) Companies should "file" not just "furnish," conflict minerals disclosure, and that disclosure must include strong, defined due diligence and evidence and identification of all known countries of origin and actual specific origin of minerals if known for the DRC.
4) Finally, the rules must carefully define recycled metals as 100% post-consumer metals. Recycled metals that are labeled through a Conflict Minerals Report as "DRC conflict free" must be only post-consumer recycled metals. This precise definition of recycled is necessary to avoid potentially allowing newly-mined gold to be masked as manufacturing scrap or other poorly-defined category of metals.
Thank you for considering my comments. I urge you to ensure that the final rules are robust and comprehensive in order to help limit the sales of "blood gold" by jewelry and electronics retailers.