Document 0jNQo0zZq4BgRL70ewkeo7XO

February 15, 1968 TO: FROM: w. J. Sheehan S. M. Lillis CUSTOMER: Caterpillar RE: VICTOCOR 300 Complaint (A) Attached is copy of SML memo to L. Dymitro asking for a review of our VICTOPAC 61 capabilities and our VICTOCOR 300 capabilities (dated 1/19/68). THERE HAS BEEN NO ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THIS MEMO AND NO ANSWERS FROM L.S.D. (B) Attached is a copy of comprehensive report from J. A. Ulrich to J. G. Belter (dated 2/6/68). THERE HAS BEEN ACKNOWLEDGMENT FROM L.S.D. fr-. (C) Attached is copy of memo from JGB to L. S. Dymitro t rl (dated 2/1/68). i/i^ hi ^ THIS HAS BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED BY L.S.D., BUT NOT PROPERLY ANSWERED. (D) Attached is photostat of JGB copy of L.S.D. memo (dated 2/8/68). YOU CAN SEE THAT GASKET ENGINEERING HAS NO ASSUR ANCE THAT PROPER, COMPLETE, AND ENDURING STEPS ARE BEING TAKEN TO PREVENT A RECURRENCE. (E) We have an awful lot at stake with this new material. We cannot afford to have loop-holes or possible slips that will introduce off-spec VICTOCOR 300 bodies into the gasket assembly. The balance of wire ring, flange and body are precise, yet within our capabilities. We point out that we have a new Sales Engineer, formerly with Application Engineering. We don't want him to run into a disaster situ ation if we don't maintain assured control. MAY WE HAVE YOUR COMMENTS ON THE STEPS TO BE TAKEN BY QUALITY CONTROL AND MANUFACTURING TO ATTAIN AND MAINTAIN THIS NECESSARY CONTROL. p, yyj. f-- 6 VPD-91-0002992