TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. National Center for Advanced Materials Performance (NCAMP) & National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) A. Executive Summary B. Background: NCAMP C. Background: NNMI

II. Wichita State University ACTT Center: A DoD Aerospace Industry Cluster

Technology Transition Program A. Executive Summary & Background B. H.R. 1960 C. Senate Report 113-85 Department of Defense Approriations Bill, 2014

III. Extension of FAA Center of Excellence for Composites and Advanced Materials (CECAM) A. Executive Summary B. Background C. Public Law 112-95: FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

IV. FAA Budget Line Request A. Background & Funding Specifics B. Research, Engineering, and Development (Airport and Airway Trust Fund) C. GAO: Status of FAA’s Actions to Oversee the Safety of Composite Airplanes

V. Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP)

A. Executive Summary B. Background C. Brooking Metropolitan Policy Program - Locating American Manufacturing:

Trends in the Geography of Production – Wichita, KS Metro Area

VI. Wichita State University’s proposed Innovation Campus A. Overview B. Schematics

I. National Center for Advanced Materials Performance (NCAMP) & National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI)

I. A. Executive Summary

We request that Wichita State University’s National Center for Advanced Materials Performance (NCAMP) is added as a National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) center under the supervision of the FAA. NCAMP as an NNMI center would complement all existing centers and the President’s vision.

I. B. Background: NCAMP

The National Center for Advanced Materials Performance (NCAMP) was established in 2005 to accelerate advances in processing and fabrication technologies for lightweight and modern advanced materials1 (in the target range of Manufacturing Readiness Level 4–7) and facilitate this technology transition to U.S. manufacturing enterprises. NCAMP’s goal is to accelerate the insertion of advanced materials into the production process by developing design allowables and numerical/analytical techniques, making the materials readily available at the beginning of the design process for full realization of the material performance potential.

The major objectives of NCAMP are as follows: Increase the efficiency of advanced material implementation into new vehicles,

vessels, and aircraft, while at the same time decreasing the cost of these materials. Facilitate growth of the use of advanced materials in manufacturing applications

while addressing performance, safety, and certification issues in order to ensure operational goals.

Examine old guidance materials related to advanced materials and determine the relevance with respect to new advances in technology.

Promote the cost-effective use of advanced materials to reduce the direct operating cost

Integrate the results of research performed within NCAMP to form a basis for standard engineering practice and training within the Department of Defense (DoD) advanced materials community and assist in creating relevant policy and guidance materials to advance future usage.

The primary philosophical difference that NCAMP promotes is illustrated in Figure 1. As shown, the typical approach to using a material within an industrial application results in a finite project to develop and utilize the material. After this process, the results are typically not shared outside the product application of the original equipment manufacturer (OEM), resulting in an economically inefficient use of the material. NCAMP transforms this practice to a continuous approach in which developed material is continuously monitored at a centralized location, and results evaluating the material stability are provided. This occurs on a centralized basis outside a particular product application but in coordination with multiple OEMs wishing to utilize the material in production.

                                                            1 Modern materials include the following: newly designed metallic alloys and non-metallic composite materials.

Figure 1. NCAMP Model Continuous Project

A major objective of any advanced materials program is to employ new technology with a minimal amount of development cycle time. Currently, most manufacturing companies are investigating in extreme methods to reduce costs and increase operational efficiency through the utilization of new materials and innovative manufacturing methods. The amount of time saved in the development of a new production cycle is directly proportional to the total unit cost savings and DOC. Unless new advanced materials technology becomes as accessible to the engineering community as that of traditional metallic materials, then the total DOC benefits are lost. The lack of standardization and loss of engineering poses safety and certification issues and limits product applications. In order to truly gain the benefits of using an advanced material, the material must approach the supply stability of an equivalent traditional metallic material. Figure 2 depicts a typical problem commonly encountered with adopting a new material application into production. In the old process, material properties values are commonly not stabilized prior to finalizing the design. This type of situation is one of the most adverse situations that can be encountered in any program, and results in the true characteristics of the material being treated essentially as an unknown. This typically results in over-conservatism in the design due to increased safety factors and negating the benefits of using an advanced material form. NCAMP seeks to provide a program for material supply in which material properties are stabilized prior to the initial design.

[ C o n t in u o u s P ro je c t ]

O L D A P P R O A C H

Q u a li fy M a te r ia lQ u a li ty C o n tro l

(p a s s / fa il)

D e v e lo pM a te r ia l

Q u a lifyM a te r ia l

Q u a li ty C o n tro l(p a s s / fa il)

M o n ito rM a te r ia l , S P C

P e r io d icP ro p e r ty T e s t in g

E v a lu a teM a te r ia l C h a n g e s

C h a ra c te r iz eM a te r ia l

P ro p e r ty D a ta b a s e ,S p e c if ic a t io n s

[ F in it e P r o je c t ]

C O N T E M P O R A R Y A P P R O A C H

D e v e lo p M a te r ia l

C o n t in u o u s Q u a li tyIm p ro v e m e n t

[ C o n t in u o u s P ro je c t ]

O L D A P P R O A C H

Q u a li fy M a te r ia lQ u a li ty C o n tro l

(p a s s / fa il)

D e v e lo pM a te r ia l

Q u a lifyM a te r ia l

Q u a li ty C o n tro l(p a s s / fa il)

M o n ito rM a te r ia l , S P C

P e r io d icP ro p e r ty T e s t in g

E v a lu a teM a te r ia l C h a n g e s

C h a ra c te r iz eM a te r ia l

P ro p e r ty D a ta b a s e ,S p e c if ic a t io n s

[ F in it e P r o je c t ]

C O N T E M P O R A R Y A P P R O A C H

D e v e lo p M a te r ia l

C o n t in u o u s Q u a li tyIm p ro v e m e n t

Figure 2. NCAMP Material Properties Stabilized Prior to Design

The ability to leapfrog the current evolutionary progress in the development of advanced materials technology is a major objective of this center. With recent advances in science and engineering, many emerging technologies will likely accelerate the development of vehicle performance during the next decade. Moreover, the strategic integration of these technologies will provide for the next major gains in vehicle performance. NCAMP’s also works in combination with other international organizations such as SAE International and ASTM International, as well as the FAA and NASA, in formulating this transformation. NCAMP accounts for industrial factors, as well as safety and operational assurance, in order to be successful in achieving the goal of employing advanced materials technology to the greatest benefit of the DoD community. NCAMP brings together large and small businesses (including OEMs, component suppliers, additional manufacturers and product designers); defense contractors; defense acquisition program offices; defense research and engineering enterprises; academia; and federal, state, and local government agencies to accelerate innovation by investing in industrially-relevant advanced manufacturing technologies. Such technologies will significantly reduce the workload and associated costs of both the manufacturer and regulatory agencies by developing and refining critical material manufacturing solutions that will enable current and future commercial and DoD acquisition programs to achieve critical cost and production goals. This concept is based on NCAMP’s successful operation for the past 18 years in a non-metallic materials industry. In 2013, NCAMP provided more than 150 members, affiliates and supporting organizations with a center for the validation and quality assurance of advanced materials for application in the commercial and military aviation and space industry through data-sharing among multiple users, statistical continuity from one length-scale to another, and reduced testing via increased capability and use of numerical/analytical simulation tools (See Figure 3).

Figure 3. NCAMP Network

From 1995 to 2012, more than 80 material qualification and equivalency programs that have required direct federal regulatory oversight have used the NCAMP process, and approximately 32 additional advanced materials systems are currently undergoing the qualification process. NCAMP has established procedures for material qualification and data acquisition for non-metallic materials that have been accepted by the FAA, NASA, and DoD. The overall system has proven to hasten and aid aircraft companies in advanced material use as well as aircraft certification. In 2010, the FAA issued a policy memorandum (AIR100-2010-102-003) in support of the NCAMP shared-database approach and acceptance of the data and specification generated. This memorandum provides the ability for the aviation industry to incorporate material property databases directly into design and production without the previous qualification and certification period, which has historically decreased the ability for these types of materials to be fully utilized.

NCAMP will extend to advanced material manufacturing and material qualification programs that have successfully required the appropriate level of documentation (such as test plans, material and process specification, conformity inspections on specimens and test setups, and test witnessing) and be able to interface with the newly formed National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) centers. The NCAMP model can uniquely leverage a successful commercialization track record for the introduction of novel materials through integrated design and manufacturing of lightweight composite components and structures for commercial and defense applications, and verify those designs through pilot production and validation using experimental testing. These novel

materials to commercialization competencies can be repurposed for parallel/complimentary development of lightweight and modern metals.

To illustrate and highlight the model being proposed for NCAMP, one of the contract reports that NCAMP wrote for the NASA AGATE program evolved into an FAA policy (Policy Statement Number ACE-00-23.613-01; Volume 65, Number 114) and is referenced in virtually every composite aircraft presently certified by the FAA, thus having an impact on all composite certifications of aircraft in the future. This document was quoted as “one of the most significant accomplishments of general aviation research at (NASA) Langley” (Concept to Reality: Contributions of the NASA Langley Research Center to US Civil Aircraft in the 1990s, NASA SP-2003-4529). During this time period, the partnership with academia, industry, FAA, DoD, and NASA helped establish certification standards for composite materials that revolutionized the way in which they are certified and used on aircraft by creating a series of composite material databases. Through these shared databases, a manufacturer can select an approved composite material system to fabricate parts and perform a smaller subset of testing for a specific application. Through the joint collaboration of three government agencies, (NASA, DoD, and FAA) NCAMP was able to reduce the time required for certification of new composite materials by a factor of four and the cost of certification by a factor of ten, as depicted in the Figure 4. This can be replicated for novel metallic materials.

Figure 4. NCAMP Time and Cost Efficiences

NCAMP will draw together the best talents and capabilities from all collaborative entities to focus on the integrated design and manufacturing of lightweight component and structures for commercial and defense applications, verification of those designs through pilot production, and validation through experimental testing. To solve industry-relevant problems, NCAMP will leverage an industry-wide technology base and employ an integrated approach that includes system engineering coupled with materials design and advanced manufacturing to accelerate the time-to-market for new structural alloys through development of design guides, certification, and cost-effective, scalable production methods. NCAMP will support the development of an advanced material supplier base to help advance the U.S. domestic manufacturing sector by scaling-up existing and alternative production methods as well as issuing guidelines for testing, qualifying, certifying, maintaining, and repairing modern metals, including life-cycle analysis. Increased

availability of lightweight materials will enhance the performance of U.S. manufacturing and increase global competitiveness by achieving quantum improvements in performance, affordability, sustainability, and reliability of defense, energy, transportation and general engineered product sectors. Outcomes will include significant fuel reduction, increased payloads and greater speed and agility of manned, unmanned, and systems. NCAMP will provide sustainable support to the innovative capabilities and competitiveness of companies, innovators and inventors through the following roles: Reducing the technical and economic risks of light-weight projects that involve

research and development (R&D). Rapidly implementing R&D results in the form of market-oriented innovations. Enhancing the level of collaboration of companies and research organizations, and

accelerating and expanding technology transfer and technology diffusion. Leveraging new and existing resources to improve innovation, cooperation, and

network management within the manufacturing sector. Equipping regional manufacturers with the resources and workforce to modernize

the manufacturing base and position the region’s advanced manufacturing cluster for future growth, stability, and global competitiveness.

Building workforce skills at all levels to enhance manufacturing capabilities in companies large and small.

NCAMP will be the anchor to the U.S. innovation commercialization ecosystem, with a vision for national and international preeminence. This ecosystem will be designed to draw from earlier-stage materials research and development from across the country. The philosophy being proposed and used in NCAMP ties in directly with the Materials Genome Initiative to accelerate the use of advanced materials and increase the time-to-market and overall material performance over existing materials used today. The long-term mission of NCAMP is to do the following:

1. Serve as a technical center of excellence providing technical solutions and innovation infrastructure to support manufacturing enterprises of all sizes and ensure that the U.S. manufacturing sector is a key pillar in an enduring and thriving economy.

2. Increase the successful transition of lightweight and other emerging modern metals by enabling advanced manufacturing innovation.

3. Create an adaptive workforce capable of meeting industry needs.

I. C. Background: NNMI

“Our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing... Last year, we created our first manufacturing innovation institute in Youngstown, Ohio. A once-shuttered warehouse is now a state-of-the art lab where new workers are mastering the 3D printing that has the potential to revolutionize the way we make almost everything. There’s no reason this can’t happen in other towns.

So tonight, I’m announcing the launch of three more of these manufacturing hubs, where businesses will partner with the Department of Defense and Energy to turn regions left behind by globalization into global centers of high-tech jobs. And I ask this Congress to help create a network of 15 of these hubs and guarantee that the next revolution in manufacturing is made right here in America. We can get that done.” -- President Obama, State of the Union Address, Feb. 12, 2013

President Obama has proposed building a National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI), consisting of regional hubs that will accelerate development and adoption of cutting-edge manufacturing technologies for making new, globally competitive products.

Individually and together, these regional hubs—public-private partnerships called Institutes for Manufacturing Innovation (IMIs)—will help to strengthen the competitiveness of existing U.S. manufacturers, initiate new ventures, and boost local and state economies. (See NNMI at a Glance.) The President unveiled his plan for the NNMI in March 2012. In his 2013 State of the Union Address, the President renewed his call for creating a full-fledged nationwide network devoted to innovating and scaling up advanced manufacturing technologies and processes. He has asked Congress to authorize a one-time $1 billion investment—to be matched by private and other non-federal funds-to create a network of up to 15 IMIs.

In July 2013, the President further proposed building out the initial network to encompass 45 IMIs over 10 years.

Over the past year, the Administration has made significant progress in planning the network of regional manufacturing institutes. And it took the first step toward building this 21st century “industrial commons” by launching, through executive action, a pilot manufacturing institute as a public-private partnership.

The competitively selected National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute (NAMII) was launched in August 2012. NAMII was established with an initial federal investment of $30 million, using existing authorities in the Departments of Defense and Energy and other federal agencies. NAMII, a consortium that includes manufacturing firms, universities, community colleges, and non-profit organizations from the Ohio-Pennsylvania-West Virginia ‘Tech Belt,’ is led by the non-profit National Center for Defense Manufacturing and Machining (NCDMM). The NAMII partners more than matched the federal investment, contributing almost $40 million in support.

The interagency Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office (AMNPO) conducted a nationwide “crowd sourcing” effort to gather stakeholder ideas and suggestions. The outreach effort consisted of regional workshops for stakeholders and a formal request for information. The AMNPO analyzed the input received from nearly 900 organizations and individuals distilled their ideas and recommendations into National Network for Manufacturing Innovation: A Preliminary Design, a report issued by the White House National Science and Technology Council on Jan. 16, 2013.

In his 2013 State of the Union Address, the President acted to sustain and build on this momentum toward ensuring that “the next revolution in manufacturing is made right here in America.”

He announced taking immediate steps, through executive action, to launch three manufacturing institutes aligned with the missions of the Departments of Defense and Energy, which will provide the bulk of federal funds. At the same time, the Administration will work with Congress to establish a truly nationwide network of manufacturing institutes, each one focusing on advanced manufacturing technology challenges and opportunities identified by U.S. industry and collaborators in open solicitations and funding competitions.

II. Wichita State University Aerospace Industry Cluster Technology Transition (ACTT) Center: A DoD ACTT Program  

II. A. Executive Summary

In agreement with House DoD Authorization Bill (HR 1960), page 1003, line 44, program element 0604317F; and Senate Report 113-85 on S1429, Senate DoD Appropriations page 145, we request $5 million to establish a Wichita State University Aerospace Industry Cluster Technology Transition (ACTT) Center be added to this line. Background Wichita State University’s National Institute for Aviation Research (NIAR) is the leader among all U.S. universities in industry-supported aviation and aerospace R&D and related applications development. With the requested Department of Defense support, Wichita State will launch a new program that leverages NIAR by tapping into the technology and capabilities of the approximately 80 DoD laboratories that collectively represent the largest R&D technology base of any federal agency. With FY 2015 DoD support, Wichita State will:

Match local and regional aviation industry needs with DoD-developed technologies and capabilities and facilitate transfer, partnering, and commercialization

Catalyze the formation of new companies in Kansas to commercialize aerospace-related technologies

Promote the DoD Smalll Business Innovation Research program and assist regional companies with development of competitive proposals in aerospace

Partner with economic development organizations, the Kansas Procurement Technical Assistance Center, other universities, etc. to link DoD grant and contracting opportunities with the capabilities of Kansas and regional aerospace companies Outcomes Important to Kansas The Kansas aerospace global industry is threatened by new competitive forces outside the U.S. and needs access to new technology to remain competitive and realize new business opportunities. The Wichita State ACTT Center’s DoD-funded program will benefit local and statewide economic development; retain existing jobs and create new high paying jobs in Kansas; expand university/DoD/industry relationships and collaborations; and attract new companies, jobs and dollars to the state. Outcomes Important to DoD The U.S. Department of Defense recognizes that a strong and diversified industrial sector is vital for maintaining a strong national defense and for responding rapidly to defense mission requirements. As a result, the DoD strongly supports the development and commercialization of technology that has both defense mission and civilian marketplace applications. The ACTT Center will strengthen and expand the aviation and aerospace industrial base in Kansas and the nation, and will support the DoD’s dual-use objectives.

It will also successfully demonstrate a new, focused “cluster model” for the transfer, commercialization and transition of technologies back into the DoD that can be replicated across other industry clusters. Context of Program Kansas’ global aviation cluster is unique in the U.S., and accounts for about 20 percent of the Kansas economy and more than $7 billion in economic impact. Cessna, Bombardier Learjet, Beechcraft, Airbus and Boeing have significant operations in the state. However, competitive threats outside the U.S. put this at risk. These companies and their suppliers have technology needs that often range beyond what the Kansas universities can provide. And although much technology is available from federal laboratories, Kansas and regional businesses are at a disadvantage with respect to their ability to access it. Two primary factors are responsible. First is the scarcity of defense laboratories in this region, which limits easy and frequent access by Kansas and regional industries to DoD technology, facilities and know-how. Second is the lack of local resources working to match needs of regional aerospace companies with available DoD technologies and capabilities. Kansas businesses and industries need an organization like Wichita State’s ACTT Center working to keep them competitive by bridging the gap between their needs and sources of new technology and unique capabilities. The Wichita State ACCT Center aims its initial efforts at Kansas’ aerospace and aviation industry, with focus on technology areas important to it, such as human factors, materials, software, electronics, etc. DoD laboratories work closely with industry for procurement, R&D and technology transfer, but industries in Kansas and other states in the rural Midwest U.S. region have benefited little from these efforts.

III. Extension of the FAA Center of Excellence for Composites and Advanced Materials (CECAM)

III. A. Executive Summary

The period of performance for Wichita State University’s FAA Center of Excellence for Composites and Advanced Materials (CECAM) is set to expire in 2015. We request a language or action within a bill to extend the center’s life to 2020. CECAM is a part of the Joint Advanced Materials and Structures (JAMS) Center of Excellence, which also includes the University of Washington’s Advanced Materials in Transport Aircraft Structures (AMTAS) Center of Excellence. This action would also have support from Washington’s congressional delegation.

III. B. Background

The Center of Excellence for Composites and Advanced Materials (CECAM) is a division of the FAA’s Joint Advanced Materials and Structure Center of Excellence, established in 2004 to assist in ensuring the safe and reliable application of composites and advanced materials to commercial aircraft. CECAM is headquartered at Wichita State University’s National Institute for Aviation Research. It is composed of universities with expertise in advanced materials including core members from Northwestern University, Purdue University, Tuskegee University, the University of Delaware, and the University of California at Los Angeles.

CECAM Mission: to provide the nation with a center for the validation and quality assurance of composites and advanced materials to be applied in the construction of aircraft through:

research, testing, certification, and technology transfer coordination and cooperation with the FAA, aircraft manufacturers, materials suppliers,

and airline companies education of the aircraft manufacturing and maintenance workforces

FAA Sponsor: William J. Hughes Technical Center Director: John Tomblin. Ph.D., National Institute for Aviation Research, Wichita State University FAA COE CECAM Program Manager: Curtis Davies (609)485-8758 Primary CECAM Technical Advisors: Allen Abramowitz, Curtis Davies, Lynn Pham, David Westlund

IV. FAA Budget Line Request IV. A. Background & Funding Specifics Historically, over the past 6 years, Wichita State University’s National Institute for Aviation Research (NIAR) and the Center of Excellence for Advanced Materials in Transport Aircraft Structures (AMTAS) at the University of Washington has received funds to support advanced materials research in some of the most important problem areas of aviation. One of the most important safety research areas in aviation and of importance to the expansion of the aerospace industry is advanced materials. Currently, the economic state of the aircraft industry is reaching a critical point as aircraft manufacturers and airlines are investigating extreme methods to reduce manufacturing costs and increase operational efficiency. This search has been demonstrated by the two major large transport aircraft manufacturers, Boeing and Airbus, with the introduction of the 787, A380 and A350 which will provide the platform for the next revolution in aerospace vehicle technology. These advances in vehicle development will likely accelerate during the next decade as new emerging technologies are applied to design and placed into production throughout the aircraft industry. As this advancement of technology into application occurs, research will be needed to prove the safety and integrity of these aircraft and advanced materials for the general public. The establishment of the FAA Center of Excellence for Composites and Advanced Materials (CECAM) at WSU/NIAR and the Center of Excellence for Advanced Materials in Transport Aircraft Structures (AMTAS) at the University of Washington will play a key role in this evolution as the strategic integration of these new technologies cannot be achieved with contemporary materials and structures. AGENCY : FAA Budget Line : Advanced Structural / Structural Safety Base Funding Level Requested : $5.5 million This request would also have support the State of Washington Senators Cantwell and Murray. The basis for this request could also be centered around the September 2011 GAO report entitled "Status of FAA’s Actions to Oversee the Safety of Composite Airplanes" that was initiated into determining if there sufficient research being done to support these newer aircraft using composite materials. The findings of that report stated the ":GAO identified four key safety-related concerns with the repair and maintenance of composites in commercial airplanes—(1) limited information on the behavior of airplane composite structures, (2) technical issues related to the unique properties of composite materials, (3) standardization of repair materials and techniques, and (4) training and awareness." These are the research areas in which these additional funds could be used to address.

IV. B. Research, Engineering, and Development (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to Congressional Requesters

AVIATION SAFETY

Status of FAA’s Actions to Oversee the Safety of Composite Airplanes

September 2011

GAO-11-849

United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-11-849, a report to congressional requesters

September 2011

AVIATION SAFETY Status of FAA’s Actions to Oversee the Safety of Composite Airplanes

Why GAO Did This Study

Composite materials, made by combining materials such as carbon fibers with epoxy, have been used in airplane components for decades. Although composites are lighter and stronger than most metals, their increasing use in commercial airplane structures such as the fuselage and wings has raised safety concerns. Boeing’s 787 is the first mostly composite large commercial transport airplane to undergo the certification process. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) certify new airplane designs and evaluate the airworthiness of novel features—like composite structures—against existing safety standards, which are often based on the performance of metallic airplanes. In August 2011, FAA and EASA certified the 787, which is expected to enter commercial service in the fall of 2011.

GAO was asked to review FAA’s and EASA's certification processes and FAA's oversight of the composite airplanes once they enter service. GAO examined how FAA and EASA assessed the use of composite materials in the Boeing 787 fuselage and wings, and the extent to which FAA has addressed safety-related concerns associated with the repair and maintenance of composite airplanes. GAO reviewed certification documentation, conducted a literature search, discussed repair and maintenance issues with experts, and interviewed FAA and EASA officials and Boeing representatives. GAO is not making recommendations in this report. FAA, EASA, Boeing, and others provided technical comments, which were incorporated as appropriate.

What GAO Found

GAO found that FAA followed its certification process in assessing the Boeing 787 airplane's composite fuselage and wings (see fig.) against applicable FAA airworthiness standards. FAA applied five special conditions when it found that its airworthiness standards were not adequate to ensure that the composite structures would comply with existing safety levels. These special conditions require Boeing to take additional steps to demonstrate the 787's structures meet current performance standards. FAA also granted Boeing an equivalent level of safety finding when the manufacturer determined it could meet the standard but prove it differently from the method specified in that standard. On the basis of a review of FAA’s special condition requirements, Boeing submissions, and discussions with FAA and Boeing officials, GAO found that FAA followed its process by documenting the technical issues related to the design of the composite fuselage and wings, determining the special conditions and equivalent level of safety finding, obtaining public comments on draft special conditions, and monitoring Boeing’s compliance with those conditions.

EASA also assessed the use of composite materials in the Boeing 787 and relied on FAA to oversee Boeing’s compliance in some cases. EASA’s process for determining whether its existing airworthiness standards were adequate to ensure the 787’s composite fuselage and wings met current levels of safety was similar to FAA's special conditions process and resulted in some additional review items, partly because of differences in their respective standards.

On the basis of expert interviews and a review of literature, GAO identified four key safety-related concerns with the repair and maintenance of composites in commercial airplanes—(1) limited information on the behavior of airplane composite structures, (2) technical issues related to the unique properties of composite materials, (3) standardization of repair materials and techniques, and (4) training and awareness. None of the experts believed these concerns posed extraordinary safety risks or were insurmountable. FAA is taking action to help address these concerns identified by GAO related to the repair and maintenance of composite airplane structures. However, until these composite airplanes enter service, it is unclear if these actions will be sufficient.

Boeing 787’s Use of Composite Materials

Carbon composites

Other composites

Aluminum

Titanium

Other

Fuselage

NoseLeading edge

Trailing edge

Vertical stabilizer

Horizontal stabilizer

Rudder Tail section Wing

Source: GAO presentation of Boeing Company information.

View GAO-11-849 or key components. For more information, contact Gerald Dillingham, Ph.D., at (202) 512-2834 or dillinghamg@gao.gov.

V. Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) V. A. Executive Summary Wichita State University received a $200,000 Phase One Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) planning grant and will apply for a Phase Two grant, which is due March 14. IMCP Phase One awarded 44 communities with a total of $7 million to support the creation of economic development strategies that recognize the community’s comparative advantages as a place to do business, invest in public good, and encourage collaboration between multiple entities to expand the areas’ commercial appeal to investors. In Phase Two, up to 12 communities that come up with winning strategies will receive a designation of “Manufacturing Community” that gives them elevated consideration for $1.3 billion in federal dollars and assistance from 10 departments/agencies.  

Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) A new Federal partnership, the Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP), aims to accelerate the resurgence of manufacturing and create a competitive climate for communities to attract manufacturing jobs and investment. The IMCP encourages communities to devise comprehensive economic development strategies that strengthen their competitive edge in attracting global manufacturers and their supply chains as well as improve support for existing manufacturing businesses and workers. Below is a three-step approach to building an IMCP strategy:

• Backbone: Build an organizational backbone with the insight needed to strengthen manufacturing and fully support the work that follows.

• Assessment: Conduct a community self-assessment of the local industrial ecosystem (i.e., the whole range of physical, capital, and human resource components needed for manufacturing activities) to identify current strengths and deficiencies.

• Tune-up: Develop a comprehensive and transformational tune-up strategy that can be sustained over time.

Up to 12 communities developing winning strategies will receive a designation of “Manufacturing Community” that gives them elevated consideration for $1.3 billion in federal dollars and assistance from 10 cabinet departments/agencies. These communities would also potentially receive additional catalytic federal investments to support their economic development strategies. IMCP Playbook Flow Chart

BUSINESS ECOSYSTEMS

Often we find ourselves planning along traditional lines of thinking honed by years of experiences working in our individual spaces. The IMCP, however, is based on the concept of industrial ecology, which views a growing and prosperous community as the product of an effective industrial ecosystem. Using an ecosystem analysis, you can examine issues from multiple perspectives, usually involving aspects of sociology, the environment, economy and technology.

FACT SHEET: Attracting Manufacturing Investment in American Communities

To compete in an increasingly global economy, the United States must come up with innovative strategies that will lead to economic growth and job creation around the country. The ‘Investing in Manufacturing Com m unities Partnership’ (IMCP) seeks to enhance the way we leverage federal economic development funds to encourage American communities to focus not only on attracting individual investments one at a time, but transforming into globally-competitive manufacturing hubs.

An administration-wide initiative led by the White House and the U.S. Department of Commerce, the ‘Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership’ encourages communities to devise comprehensive economic development strategies that strengthen their competitive edge in attracting global manufacturers and their supply chain. IMCP specifically brings together the resources of multiple federal departments and agencies involved in economic development.

In Phase One of the of the Investing in Manufacturing Com m unities Partnership, 44 communities were awarded a total of $7 million to support the creation of economic development strategies that recognize the community’s comparative advantages as a place to do business, invest in public goods, and encourage collaboration between m u l t i p l e entities to expand the area’s commercial appeal to investors.

In the IMCP Phase Two, communities will have an opportunity to compete for a special designation that will elevate them in consideration for $1.3 billion in federal dollars and assistance from 10 cabinet departments /agencies. These communities could also potentially receive catalytic additional federal investments to further support their economic development strategies. The IMCP is a critical component of the Department of Commerce’s “Open for Business Agenda,” which prioritizes trade and investment.

Phase Two of the Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership In Phase Two of the IMCP, up to 12 communities that come up with winning strategies will receive a designation of “Manufacturing Community” that gives them elevated consideration for $1.3 billion in federal dollars and assistance from 10 cabinet departments / agencies. These communities would also potentially receive additional catalytic federal investments to support their economic development strategies. In order to earn the designation, communities must present strategies that identify technologies or industries in which they would be competitive in the future and would make investments in the following areas: • Workforce and training; • Supplier networks • Research and innovation;

• Infrastructure / site development, • Trade and international investment • Operational improvement and capital access

These communities will receive: • Elevated consideration for federal dollars and assistance across 10 cabinet departments /agencies, totaling $1.3

billion; • A dedicated federal liaison at these agencies who can act as their concierge to the specific services they need; • Subject to funding availability, challenge grants may become available to some awardees from the pool of

designated manufacturing communities; • Recognition on a government website, accessible to prospective private investors (foreign and domestic alike)

looking for information on communities’ competitive attributes.

IMCP Competition Process • Phase One: 44 communities were awarded with $200,000 planning grants – a total of $7 million. • Phase Two: Communities must apply by March 14, 2014 to be considered. Eligibility for Phase 2 is not

contingent on having won Phase 1.

IMCP Participating Agencies • Department of Agriculture • Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration • Department of Defense • Department of Education • Department of Energy • Department of Housing and Urban Development

• Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration • Department of Transportation • Appalachian Regional Commission • Delta Regional Authority • Environmental Protection Agency • National Science Foundation • Small Business Administration

BROOKINGS | April 2012 1

Locating American Manufacturing: Trends in the Geography of ProductionSusan Helper, Timothy Krueger, and Howard Wial1

“ Different regions

of the country,

different met-

ropolitan areas,

and even dif-

ferent counties

within the same

metropolitan

area differ greatly

in their manufac-

turing industries,

technology lev-

els, wages, and

plant sizes.”

FindingsAnalysis of data on employment, earnings, and the number of business establishments engaged in U.S. manufacturing finds that:n Metropolitan areas, especially large metropolitan areas and central metropolitan coun-

ties, contain the great majority of manufacturing jobs and nearly all very high-technology manufacturing jobs, reflecting the advantages they provide to manufacturing in general and very high-technology manufacturing in particular. In 2010, metropolitan areas con-tained 79.5 percent of all manufacturing jobs, 78.6 percent of moderately high-technology manufacturing jobs, and 95 percent of very high-technology manufacturing jobs.

n U.S. metropolitan areas have become increasingly specialized in manufacturing since 1980 but they vary widely in their manufacturing activities and focuses. Nearly all met-ropolitan areas specialize strongly in at least one manufacturing industry even if they do not specialize strongly in manufacturing as a whole.

n Manufacturing in most metropolitan areas follows one or more of six broad patterns of industry clustering. These patterns are anchored in high specializations in computers and electronics, transportation equipment, low-wage manufacturing industries, chemicals, machin-ery, and food production.

n Manufacturing wages vary widely among metropolitan areas. In the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas, the average manufacturing earnings are highest in San Jose, at about $145,000 per year, and lowest in McAllen, at about $35,000.

n Metropolitan manufacturing plants are relatively small but vary widely in size among metropolitan areas. In 2009, the average metropolitan manufacturing plant had 57.4 employ-ees, a figure that ranged from a high of 203.6 in Kingsport, TN, to a low of 9.1 in Ocean City, NJ.

n The long-term shift of manufacturing jobs toward the South came to a halt in the first decade of the 21st century, while the Midwest had the fastest manufacturing job gains over the last two years. Between 2000 and 2010 both the Midwest and the South lost about 34 percent of their manufacturing jobs, while between the first quarter of 2010 and the fourth quarter of 2011 the Midwest saw a manufacturing job gain of 5.2 percent while the South saw a gain of 2.2 percent.

n The early 21st century saw a resumption or continuation of long-term shifts of manu-facturing jobs away from metropolitan areas and central metropolitan counties. Between 2000 and 2010 the central counties of metropolitan areas with three or more counties lost 33.9 percent of their manufacturing jobs while the outlying counties of those metropolitan areas lost 29.3 percent. Although metropolitan areas lost manufacturing jobs at a slower rate than nonmetropolitan counties between 2000 and 2010, nonmetropolitan counties gained manufacturing jobs more rapidly than metropolitan areas during the past two years.

In view of these findings, public policy should enhance the innovation and productivity advan-tages that metropolitan areas offer manufacturers, while eliminating artificial incentives for manufacturers to seek low-wage locations. Because there is so much regional variation in manufacturing, federal policy should provide a platform for state, local, and metropolitan efforts, which can formulate policies to respond to regional needs.

VI. Wichita State University’s proposed Innovation Campus VI. A. Overview: Innovation Campus

Wichita State University’s new strategic plan as approved by the Board of Regents in June 2013 includes the following core institutional mission:

“The mission of Wichita State University is to be an essential educational, cultural, and economic driver for Kansas and the greater public good.”

Wichita State is well-positioned to act as a major driver of development in the state’s largest metropolitan area. The proposed program addresses the institution’s role in supporting technology-based economic growth and diversification for the purpose of enhancing job creation and increased income for the people of this metropolitan region and the state. This proposal is consistent with goals and activities of the Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce and the work currently being conducted by the Chamber’s Leadership Council.

Research by the Brookings Institution shows that, compared with all U.S. metropolitan areas, Wichita’ metropolitan GDP includes a higher percentage of exports. More than 20 percent of the metropolitan GDP is tied directly to the export market. These exports are heavily weighted in the manufacturing sectors associated with aviation. Demand for aviation equipment and aircraft is cyclical and there is increasing competition in this sector from businesses in Latin America (especially Brazil), Canada and Asia. Both of these trends increase the importance of diversifying the economic base of the region and especially in increasing the economic diversity of technology-based enterprises. These types of enterprises tend to be globally competitive, and they produce high paying jobs.

The current building project will be a huge step for Wichita State toward providing essential support for local industry and propelling the university to new standards of excellence. This new building will provide additional funding sources for the university, enhanced experiential learning opportunities for the student body and economic development opportunities for the region.

Technology Transfer Statement A central goal of the university’s Strategic Plan is to foster the transfer of advances and discoveries made by university researchers. To accomplish this, the university is actively seeking opportunities to increase invention disclosures, research and license agreements, start-ups and patents through the Office of Research and Technology Transfer. We have already seen a 300 percent increase in invention disclosures from university faculty and staff. The university’s institutional master plan calls for development of a “technology park” to house both institutional business spin-outs and technology-based businesses that benefit from co-location with institutional technical and business faculty. Similar technology parks already exist at many universities across the country, and they have significantly contributed to the competitive advantage of the metropolitan regions in which they are located.

In addition to supporting existing business and developing a technology park, this building project will allow expansion support for entrepreneurial development of technology-based businesses through expansion of existing businesses, new business spin-outs, licensing intellectual property, and supporting external entrepreneurs. This requires the university to significantly expand its space and facilities into areas that are not currently supported on campus. Of specific importance: growth of the technology sectors in Wichita can be promoted by concentration on four themes:

Increase the efficiency of current industry; help them broaden their markets using their core technologies; and support aggregation of their supply chains in the Wichita region. The proposed program plan will allow Wichita State to enhance its support for existing industry.

Encourage additional enterprises that can take advantage of the expertise associated with the current aircraft sector to relocate to Wichita; including recruitment of enterprises from other states and countries. The proposal program plan will expand the university’s capacity to assist the Chamber, city, county, and state in recruiting these businesses.

Encourage expansion or relocation of business, military, or other entities in non-aviation technology sectors. Entities in such sectors as software and software security; advanced medical manufacturing; additive manufacturing; high-end animation; and informatics would be supported by proposed program.

Encourage and support the development of new small businesses in various technology fields. National data show that at least 70 percent of new jobs will be in created in new businesses. Supporting technology transfer, helping bring ideas from inventors to market, and incubating new technology-based enterprises can have significant impact on the future economy of the metropolitan region and state.

These themes take advantage of Wichita State’s long-standing reputation in entrepreneurship and engineering. They strongly enhance the ability of the university to respond to the goals of the Governor to expand Kansas’ competitiveness, and they are consistent with the institutional master plan, strategic plan, and the goals of local government and business leadership. The proposed technology park is anticipated to become a national leader in its impact on the global competitiveness of the state.

Experiential Learning Statement Wichita State’s location in the heart of Wichita –a mecca for aircraft manufacturing, healthcare and business– provides the opportunity for applied learning and research to be infused throughout each student’s educational experience. By conducting research and internships in their fields, students gain real-world experience, allowing them to develop and apply critical skills.

Coupled with the technology transfer initiatives, the experiential learning piece of this program is essential to support and growth Wichita as an engineering hub for the United States. Wichita

currently ranks third the U.S., behind San Jose, CA and Houston, TX, in highest concentration of engineers – with 21 engineers per 1,000 employees. This is largely related to the cluster of manufacturing companies within the state, which accounts for a majority of the job sector. WSU College of Engineering (CoE) will instruct engineering classes within the experiential learning facility enabling curriculum to be delivered and practiced by students in a contextualized learning environment. According to engineering education literature, engineering students tend to drop out of college primarily in the first two years due to: 1) limited engineering involvement in the first two years and 2) student difficulty with calculus and physics. The experiential learning facility will provide an environment where students can continue to engage in engineering design and projects throughout their course of study. Projects will require practical application of calculus and physics thereby increasing student comprehension and retention of challenging engineering fundamentals.

The State of Kansas aims to increase the number of engineering degrees awarded by the three state universities. The experiential learning facility will support the development, retention and degree completion of WSU student engineers, inventors and entrepreneurs by providing an environment that nurtures their creative and innovative energy/potential and providing tools, space and skills training to make their project ideas into evolve into reality. WSU students will become engineers by doing and experiencing engineering, i.e. through an experience-based pedagogical approach, thereby creating an unparalleled environment to continuously educate and train students and workers in advanced manufacturing skills.

The concept for experiential learning in engineering differs from the traditional cooperative education model, which is already a strong suit of the university. Traditional cooperative education models are structured in which classroom-based education is combined with practical work experience that usually takes place during the summer or part-time during a semester near graduation. The new experiential learning model will allow students to work long-term on campus during the full-year to advance industry research initiatives. To survive and thrive throughout drastic changes in history, humans adapt and learn in ways that are unprecedented. In an era of reduced state funding and emphasis on industry collaboration and economic development, WSU must make significant changes to its fundamental operating procedures and teaching strategies. With the growing demand for experienced engineers in industry, WSU has dedicated a majority of the proposed building space to experiential learning environments to enhance the experience level of graduating engineers.

VI. B. Schematics

Location of Innovation Campus

Technology Facility II (Phase One) Aerial Rendering

Technology Facility II (Phase One) Renderings

Innovation Campus Aerial Rendering