Coinbuf

My grade would be MS63RD, worth about $.15 cents.

It has been spooned, google spooned coins and you will see images like your coin.

Not an error just damaged. Looks like it was exposed to high heat.

I would not introduce any material into a coin album, albums are designed to be archival quality.   Putting materials that are not produced for archival purposes could have a negative effect on the coins.

I would not introduce any material into a coin album, albums are designed to be archival quality.   Putting materials that are not produced for archival purposes could have a negative effect on the coins.

It has been spooned, google spooned coins and you will see images like your coin.

The 1955 doubled die obverse cent is classified as a die variety, not a mint error, because the obvious doubling was in the die that struck the coins and imparted it to all the coins it struck. A mint error is created by flaws in the planchet or striking of an individual coin, and each one is usually different from all others.  
   Your coin is an ordinary 1955 cent in at best a lower end mint state grade and worth less than a dollar. Contrary to what you may have seen on some websites that spread disinformation, it is extremely unusual to find any major mint error, die variety, or other coin of substantial value in your change or in accumulations of coins.
   From what resources (print and online) are you obtaining your information about coins?
 

Slight white is the name of the company, slight white has no affiliation with CAC.
CAC chose the sticker colors, and as I said they do not identify coins that do not sticker to prevent impacting the value of those coins if/when they might be sold or auctioned off in the future.   Would you want a brown turd sticker placed onto your favorite coin and see a 1/3rd reduction of its value in the marketplace, I doubt you would and thus why CAC does not make the information on coins that failed public.   Just because a coin fails at CAC does not mean that the coin is junk, only that it does not qualify as solid (or better) for the grade in the opinion of CAC.   Not all MS65's are equal, some are just better than others, CAC attempts to identify those with their sticker, a failed coin might be overgraded or have surface issues in the eyes of CAC, but just like grading it is only one opinion.   I own several coins that I sent to CAC which failed and I still like those coins just as much today as when I bought them.
Yes you pay for the opinion whether you like or agree with that opinion or not, same as when you send coins to NGC or PCGS.   Talk to anyone that has submitted coins for grading, everyone has at one time or another gotten a coin back that did not grade or graded lower than they expected or agree with, and yes they still paid for that TPG service/grade opinion regardless of if they agree with it.
Yes, again this is not news or new, it happens with graded coins as well.   Have you ever cracked a coin out of a holder for your album?   Perhaps when you or your heirs decide to sell that coin will you then send it to a TPG for grading (now at least the second time it will be graded) or perhaps the new owner will sent it to be graded.    In many cases the grading companies have graded the same coins multiple times, this is not new.

You have much to learn grasshopper.

The coin hasn't changed since your first post so there is no reason for the replies to change.   It is a damaged coin just spend it, or continue to drive yourself crazy over nothing, your call.

If you have a local coin show, go look at as many coins in your favorite series as you can in holders, but don't buy anything.  Then, come home and look at as many coins as you can in NGC and PCGS holders in the grades you like online ( 1921 Morgan Dollars on eBay in MS65).
Do some have more chatter/bag marks than others? Are some better struck? Is the coin attractive without unsightly marks/toning? Is it original, dipped, or over-dipped? Does the coin have luster?  Is the luster broken anywhere on the coin? Are there other problems ? Has the toning etched the surface to the point of borderline environmental damage? Is the scratch a little too deep/wide for a straight grade in your opinion? Are there hairlines from a pervious cleaning (yes, cleaned coins are in straight graded holders)? Has the coin been recolored/Artificially Toned (AT) Are the surfaces hard/smooth, or is there micro porosity? Are there rim dings? etc. etc. etc. Make a note of the coin... then look at the same coin, in the same grade, in the same way.  Is it better/worse/same?  Then another, and another.  You will find a LOT of variation in the same grade.  Try to stay with one type, date and mintmark at a time (i.e. comparing a 1938-D Buffalo Nickel and a 1926-D Buffalo Nickel would be challenging, as the 26-D is almost guaranteed to be more weakly struck.  As a newer grader without appreciation for the series, this may be confused with wear). 

You have much to learn grasshopper.

You have much to learn grasshopper.

Rim damage is a tough call, I've seen many worse that straight graded and many with slighter damage that were bagged or details graded.   If I were betting on the outcome I would say it will get a details grade, but I would not be surprised if it straight graded too.

Grading is super nuanced, subjective and highly controversial.  CAC was designed for collectors to get an independent, expert opinion on coins that are "solid for the grade" (green), or "would be solid for the next grade up" (gold).  Now, CAC has started CACG; an independent TPG with its own holders.  I will say that CAC is a bit of a mess right now since all of the new business models have started in VA.  However, historically CAC stickers have been a market maker.  A gold CAC will almost always sell for more than the next highest grade coin.
 The crack-out game, and the sticker games are real.  I am not saying it's wrong at all, but it add another layer of nuance to an already complicated hobby.  CAC stickers matter, because John Albanese is an expert grader and is seen as numismatic royalty.  Rick Snow is known for being an expert in Flying Eagle and Indian Head Cents, so his Eagle Eye stickers hold some weight on those types.  Stacks/David Hall CMQ stickers remain to be seen as a differentiator in the marketplace, but perhaps collectors will see them as the new "independent" validation source.  The rest are actually silly, and I smile when I see a coin with three stickers.
In the end.... you either like the coin, or you don't.

And chances are these are coins that were right on the bubble...an inflection point....between 2 grades where the higher one means alot more $$$ for the owner.  The Franklin Gradeflation Thread ATS is the classic example where an astute collector DID re-submit and could not get the upgrade and the coin eventually went up like 1 1/2 grades with a CAC (I believe) and sold for like 25x the amount he sold it for. 
Happened in like 18 months or something relatively quick, as I recall.

Welcome to the NGC chat board.
   Based on the photo and assuming that the anomaly involves metal that is flaking or peeling off of the coin, I think that it is what is known as a planchet lamination. See https://www.error-ref.com/?s=lamination.  I agree with @Greenstang that in-hand examination would be necessary for a sound opinion.

No none of these Indian Head cents are in good enough condition to send to a grading company, save your money.

Rim damage is a tough call, I've seen many worse that straight graded and many with slighter damage that were bagged or details graded.   If I were betting on the outcome I would say it will get a details grade, but I would not be surprised if it straight graded too.

Using your logic, I could pick up a rock out of my driveway, list it on eBay for a hundred bucks, and claim, "it may contain a diamond, but I don't know. Judge for yourself."
Technically not illegal, I suppose, but definitely slimy, as Coinbuf said. Add to that the fact that you repeatedly spammed this forum after being told it was not acceptable, and I have to conclude that you are definitely someone of low moral character. That may not bother you even a little bit, but if I knew that a whole forum full of people felt that way about me, I would give some thought to changing my ways.

You are the type of corrupt slimy type of person that gives numismatics a bad name.

As both are heavily counterfeited so unless you are extremely confident in the source of your raw coins you would be far ahead of the game to buy one or both of these coins in a reputable TPG holder.   That does not guarantee that you will not buy a counterfeit but you have the TPG guaranty of authenticity to fall back on, there is seldom a guarantee like that from your local coin shop.
You seem to have some real heartburn on this why?   CAC is doing nothing different than NGC or PCGS yet you have singled them out and seem to be implying that they are harming submitters, why?   Why is it ok for NGC to regrade a coin several times but it is not ok for CAC to review a coin more than once?   I see no difference as both firms have the same opportunity to make grading fees from the same coin as many times as it is submitted.   In fact CAC has on very rare occasion changed their opinion and have awarded a bean to a coin that failed the first time around.   So a second look is not always a bad thing.
In a conversation that I read with a top grader who had been with PCGS for a very long time he referred to some coins as "old friends" because during his grading time he had seen some coins so many times that they were instantly recognizable.   When you consider the enormous volume of coins that graders see every day, it stands to reason that those old friend coins had to be submitted, and submitted and submitted a lot for them to be so easily remembered.

Yes, according to the CAC website they sticker around 45% of all coins sent to them.   That is just a general stat which does not apply across all coin types, for example gold Saints have a very low stickering success rate vs Merc dimes that have a high success rate.    CAC does not provide data on the coins they do not sticker to insure that those coins are not punished in the marketplace.

As both are heavily counterfeited so unless you are extremely confident in the source of your raw coins you would be far ahead of the game to buy one or both of these coins in a reputable TPG holder.   That does not guarantee that you will not buy a counterfeit but you have the TPG guaranty of authenticity to fall back on, there is seldom a guarantee like that from your local coin shop.
You seem to have some real heartburn on this why?   CAC is doing nothing different than NGC or PCGS yet you have singled them out and seem to be implying that they are harming submitters, why?   Why is it ok for NGC to regrade a coin several times but it is not ok for CAC to review a coin more than once?   I see no difference as both firms have the same opportunity to make grading fees from the same coin as many times as it is submitted.   In fact CAC has on very rare occasion changed their opinion and have awarded a bean to a coin that failed the first time around.   So a second look is not always a bad thing.
In a conversation that I read with a top grader who had been with PCGS for a very long time he referred to some coins as "old friends" because during his grading time he had seen some coins so many times that they were instantly recognizable.   When you consider the enormous volume of coins that graders see every day, it stands to reason that those old friend coins had to be submitted, and submitted and submitted a lot for them to be so easily remembered.

Slight white is the name of the company, slight white has no affiliation with CAC.
CAC chose the sticker colors, and as I said they do not identify coins that do not sticker to prevent impacting the value of those coins if/when they might be sold or auctioned off in the future.   Would you want a brown turd sticker placed onto your favorite coin and see a 1/3rd reduction of its value in the marketplace, I doubt you would and thus why CAC does not make the information on coins that failed public.   Just because a coin fails at CAC does not mean that the coin is junk, only that it does not qualify as solid (or better) for the grade in the opinion of CAC.   Not all MS65's are equal, some are just better than others, CAC attempts to identify those with their sticker, a failed coin might be overgraded or have surface issues in the eyes of CAC, but just like grading it is only one opinion.   I own several coins that I sent to CAC which failed and I still like those coins just as much today as when I bought them.
Yes you pay for the opinion whether you like or agree with that opinion or not, same as when you send coins to NGC or PCGS.   Talk to anyone that has submitted coins for grading, everyone has at one time or another gotten a coin back that did not grade or graded lower than they expected or agree with, and yes they still paid for that TPG service/grade opinion regardless of if they agree with it.
Yes, again this is not news or new, it happens with graded coins as well.   Have you ever cracked a coin out of a holder for your album?   Perhaps when you or your heirs decide to sell that coin will you then send it to a TPG for grading (now at least the second time it will be graded) or perhaps the new owner will sent it to be graded.    In many cases the grading companies have graded the same coins multiple times, this is not new.