At the first opportunity we will want to discuss this whole program with you. It is our opinion it would be helpful if members of the subcommittee could meet with the various manufacturers involved for a general discussion. Sincerely, L. E. PASEK, Washington Office: L. E. PASEK, Washington Representative. KIMBERLY-Clark Corp., I was a little surprised to see the last paragraph of your letter of May 27 to Mr. Coughlin in which you proposed a joint meeting of members of the UU-C-843 subcommittee and the various manufacturers involved for a general discussion. We are not at the moment in favor of promoting such a meeting and this idea was conveyed to Stearns & Foster and Wood Conversion through Burch's letters of May 12 to these concerns. If you are not in agreement with this, perhaps we ought to get our heads together and arrive at something that will get us on the same track. This whole specification situation seems to be more confusing. We understand that Mr. Bienfang is seriously considering abandoning the whole UU-C-843 specification in favor of a specification of his own. The whole picture does not look too encouraging at the moment. R. P. SAWTELL. JUNE 29, 1953. Mr. C. H. FELTON, Alcott Hall, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. FELTON: Attached is copy of UU-C-843a (draft) dated June 1, 1953. I have made some notes and will endeavor to give you some comments regarding these at the earliest possible date. Thank you for the opportunity to look this over. Sincerely, L. E. PASEK, Washington Representative. Mr. WALDEN. On the same subject of specifications, did you write to Mr. N. G. Bull on May 8, 1953; who is Mr. Bull? Mr. PASEK. He is a very able employee of our company. Mr. WALDEN. Did you write to him on May 8, 1953, the following: We were instrumental in getting this specification in its present shape. We hope it is satisfactory to you. We are now, primarily, concerned that the Bureau of Engraving will receive bids. Will you please see to this matter. Mr. WALDEN. And during that period were you instrumental in getting this specification in its present shape with respect to Bureau of Engraving and Printing? Mr. PASEK. No; I think that perhaps was all handled by Mrs. Weirich, my secretary. I think it was perhaps all handled by her. Mr. WALDEN. I wish to indicate for the record at this time that there is a telegram from N. G. Bull, dated Neenah, April 6, 1953, which is addressed to you. Mr. PASEK. Right. Mr. WALDEN. And it reads: Suggest Bureau of Engraving refer to USAF Specification No. 15015-A, copy of which is being airmailed to you. This specification will be revised in the near future and issued as a mil spec. And then it discusses the revision. And then there is this memo to Mr. N. G. Bull, which I just read, and the initials on that memoran dum, LEP:w, indicating insofar as Mr. Bull is concerned that you dictated this letter. Mr. PASEK. I would like to call your attention to the fact that it is a company policy that whoever was the responsible head of an office, the communications always carried their name. Mr. WALDEN. Is it your testimony that you had nothing to do with this matter? Mr. PASEK. I don't recall having anything directly to do with it. It was probably handled as a routine matter. Mr. WALDEN. In any event this memorandum says that you were instrumental in doing it. Mr. PASEK. Bragging a little maybe. (The documents referred to are as follows:) MAY 8, 1953. Subject: Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Invitation for Bids, BEP-223. To: N. G. BULL. We were instrumental in getting this specification in its present shape. We hope it is satisfactory to you. We are now, primarily, concerned that the Bureau of Engraving will receive bids. Will you please see to this matter? Sincerely, L. E. PASEK. Mr. WALDEN. Now just briefly, Mr. Pasek, did other matters relating to company business that you engaged in, while you were a WOČ, involve the matter of an employee named Churm who was in the service? Mr. PASEK. The office handled that case. I can't recall what I had to do with it. Mr. WALDEN. I would like to introduce in the record The CHAIRMAN. Before you do that on this memo, dated May 8, to Mr. N. G. Bull written by you, do I understand you to say that that memo is inaccurate and when the statement appears under your signature: We were instrumental in getting this specification in its present shapeyou feel that is not a proper reflection of what happened? Mr. PASEK. I didn't say that at all. The CHAIRMAN. I beg your pardon. Mr. PASEK. I did not-counsel asked me if during the time I was a WOC, that had taken place and I said "No." That is what I am referring to and the "we" in that memo does not refer to me personally but refers to Kimberly-Clark. I happened to know that because I looked at the memo yesterday. Mr. WALDEN. May I introduce in the record in any event documents addressed to Mr. Pasek-which are tape-what are these documents? Mr. PASEK. Teletypes. Mr. WALDEN. Addressed to Mr. Pasek and signed by Mr. Pasek, indicating that they were signed by and addressed to Mr. Pasek whether he had anything to do with the matter of Mr. Churm or not. I NENA 4-6-53 1145A J LE PASEX WASH SUGGEST BUREAU F ENGRAVING REFER TO USAF SPEC NO. 13015-A, COPY AND OTHER DEFECTS. N``G BULL LAST WORD IN THIRD FROM BT SOTTON IS SMOOTH AND JUST ABOVE SND READ No reply yet to our March 9 letter re Churm. Little early no doubt, but do you think it would do any good to make a check. O. K. with us if you feel we should let well enough alone. PLS ADP. PLS ADV. ADV STED ADP. F. F. MARTIN, Neenah: F. F. MARTIN. WASHINGTON, March 26, 1953. Re your 1 of today we have checked with the Office of The Adjutant General regarding application of Lieutenant Churm and have learned that it was reviewed and considered from all angles but it has been turned down again. A letter is going out to you to this effect within few days in reply to Mr. Boon's letter of March 9. L. E. PASEK. MARCH 9, 1953. Re Lt. Peter Churm, Army Serial No. 0997058, Ordnance Corps, United States Army, Ordnance Ammunition Center, Joliet, Ill. OFFICE OF THE ADJUTANT GENERAL, Department of the Army, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: It is our understanding that the above-named Peter Churm, now on active duty at the Ordnance Ammunition Center at Joliet, Ill., is not subject to release through regular procedures until about September 1 of 1954. However, it appears that except for a combination of circumstances surrounding his involuntary recall, he might have been able to return to his civilian job by March of 1953, or sooner. As his file will show, we wrote a letter in support of his request for an earlier release, dated December 24, 1952. We are informed that this request has been turned down. In view of the fact that we are short of men of Lieutenant Churm's caliber, we are still very much interested in obtaining his services as a key man in our production planning department. Lieutenant Churm is a highly valued employee and is destined to progress to a high position in our organization. There are opportunities at present which will be to the mutual advantage of both Lieutenant Churm and the corporation if he can return at this time. Since he apparently does not intend to make the Army his career, we feel justified in reaffirming our support of his previous request for release. Therefore, in view of our interest in this case, we respectfully request that his file be reviewed again. We will appreciate hearing from you as to the out come. Yours very truly, HENRY G. BOON, V. P. L. PASEK, Washington, D. C.: KIMBERLY-CLARK, CORP., Our Army subject suggests writing to Adjutant General. Could we write instead to the person you contacted? What do you think about contacting Senator Wiley? Thanks. F. F. MARTIN. WASHINGTON, March 5, 1953. F. F. MARTIN, Neenah: Re your 1 of today I suggest writing to the Adjutant General. Do not contact Senator Wiley. L. E. PASEK. Mr. Mead said that Churm has made a couple of applications for release from active duty prior to this time; also have statements to substantiate this from our company. Both applications have gone clear to the top people and have been disapproved both times. It appears there is no way Churm can be relieved from duty until the 31st of July or August 1954. [Handwritten note:] 3/4/53. Reported above to F. Martin via phone. [Initials illegible.] LEM PASEK, Washington, D. C.: KIMBERLY-CLARK, CORP., Info on Lt. Peter Churm is serial No. 0997058, Ordnance Corps, United States Army. [Handwritten note:] AGO Information X53241. F. F. MARTIN. Mrt. Handling. Sent to Coosa. Marine Reserves-caled up Coosa got 60 ext. Jim Simpson-Col. Ash called. Churm transferred Marine to Army. Assigned to Simpson in Ord. at Joliet. Churm thinks he should be out by 3/1. Mr. WALDEN. There is another matter that you handled for the company while you were a WOC, the use of Kinross Air Force Base by planes of Kimberly-Clark. Mr. PASEK. I was only apprised of that after the fact that was handled by the secretary in the Washington office of our company. Mr. WALDEN. There are a number of letters signed by and addressed to Mr. Pasek, at least from the appearance of the documents Mr. PASEK. I happen to recall that I did not personally do anything about it. I was too busy with my WOC assignment and it was something that Mrs. Weirich could handle and she did very ably as the results indicated. (The document referred to is as follows:) Col. VICTOR MILNER, Base Commander, Kinross Air Force Base, Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. JULY 3, 1953. DEAR COLONEL MILNER: Attached are two sets each of Air Force forms 180 and 181 covering the following: Douglas DC-3, Beechcraft D18-S-Kimberly-Clark Corp., Neenah, Wis. DC-3C (C47-A)-Spruce Falls Transport Co. (Spruce Falls Power & Paper Co., Ltd.), Toronto, Canada. We have been in touch with the Real Estate Division, Directorate of Installations, DCS/O, HQ USAF, Washington 25, D. C., regarding our problem of obtaining permission to land our planes at the Kinross Air Force Base. They advised us to file the above-mentioned applications with you. We shall appreciate your consideration regarding this matter. Very likely it will be more convenient for you to contact Mr. A. T. Groves, aviation supervisor, Kimberly-Clark Corp., Neenah, Wis., if you should have any questions or need further information. Sincerely yours, LEONARD E. PASEK, Washington Representative. P. S.-Note to Mr. Groves explaining that both applications were to go to Kinross. KIMBERLY-CLARK CORP., Mr. L. E. PASEK, Washington, D. C., Office: Attached you will find a letter from Brig. Gen. Kenneth P. Bergquist, regulations from the Department of the Air Force and applications executed by us for the purpose of permitting our aircraft, N90558, Beechcraft N49559, and CFGOR to land at the Kinross Airport Base, Mich. Also attached are copies of letters to General Bergquist and Colonel Milner which are self-explanatory. Today Col. Victor Milner is permitting our aircraft CFGOR to land at Kinross on his own authority by way of classifying our landing as official business. This information naturally should not be passed on since it would put the colonel in a bad position, but he is doing everything possible to cooperate with us to the fullest extent. Needless to say, this type of an operation cannot continue and we prefer not to have anyone be in an embarrassing position, either ourselves or the Army. |