DOCSLIB.ORG

Probatch Leadership Kit Automating the Kitting Process in the Aerospace Industry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Probatch Leadership Kit Automating the Kitting Process in the Aerospace Industry ProBatch Leadership Kit Automating the Kitting Process in the Aerospace Industry Table of Contents I. Situation Analysis II. Application Basics III. Graco Solution IV. Return on Investment for Aerospace Customer V. Application Benefits VI. Ordering Information and Prices VII. Other Potential Kitting Customers Automating the Kitting Process in the Aerospace Industry I. Situation Analysis Companies that paint with less than 25 gallons per day and use multiple colors generally use kitting in their operation. Even though kitting is relatively easy there is a tremendous cost associated to this method of mixing paints. Companies pay a premium to have the luxury of mixing kits instead of doing the mixing themselves. Kits consist of two (2K) or three (3K) components that are purchased in separate cans and mixed together. The benefit is that the proportion of each material is correct, which reduces errors in mix ratios, but the user lacks the flexibility in how much is mixed. For instance, if a touch up job requires one pint of paint, the combination of three components may yield a total of 1.25 gallons or the waste of one gallon of kitted paint. The main components of kits consist of the following materials. 1. resin 2. catalyst 3. solvent For the purpose of this application leadership kit, the aerospace industry will include aerospace manufacturers, aerospace feeders and military bases. The aerospace industry offers the greatest opportunities for the ProBatch system because it is an industry that requires many small amounts of a very expensive paint and is accustomed to using kits. It is not uncommon for an aerospace manufacturer to waste up to 25% of their paint. The aerospace industry has high quality standards and is closely watched by environmental agencies, therefore, the reduction of waste is on everyone’s mind. II. Application Basics The resin generally consists of a one gallon can of color, which can carry a price tag of $50 to as much as $300 per gallon. The catalyst generally consists of a one-pint can at a cost of $95 per gallon. The solvent generally consists of a one-quart can at a cost of $25 per gallon. The kitting process generates a tremendous amount of unused paint, which also comes with a disposal cost for the cans. Not to mention the premium that is paid for the smaller containers of paint. a. Materials Used in the Aerospace Industry When calling on an aerospace company it will be found that many different material suppliers will be supplying material. It is not uncommon to have as many as five different material suppliers. For instance, one company may supply the primer, another the paint for interiors, another for the landing gear and so on. A list of the main suppliers is below. Supplier Industry Application Painted Part Typical Ratio Sterling Manufacturer, Feeder, Military, Primer, Interior, 2:1 Commercial Airlines (Urethane) exterior, engine, fuselage Deft Manufacturer (primarily Boeing) Primer All 2:1:4.5 (Water Borne) U.S. Paint Manufacturer, Feeder, Military, Topcoat Interior, 3 to 4:1 Commercial Airlines (Urethane exterior, and epoxy) engine, fuselage, edges Sherwin Manufacturer, Feeder, Military, Topcoat Interior, 3 to 4:1 Williams Commercial Airlines (Urethane) exterior, engine, fuselage Dexter Manufacturer, Feeder, Military, Primer, Landing Gear 3:1:1 Commercial Airlines Topcoat or 3 to 4:1 (Urethane) Desoto Manufacturer, Feeder, Military, Anti-stat Exterior 2 to 3:1 Commercial Airlines It is recommended that material suppliers be contacted before going into a potential aerospace customer in order to determine what paint is being used and if any material changes are foreseen. Many companies still use military specification. The common military spec that is used is mil spec 1011. Another interesting note is that the Sherwin Williams’ aerospace division does not sell to the military. Only the Chemical and Coatings division sells to the military. The aerospace division has no paint that meets mil spec 1011. b. Customer Type Both the aerospace feeder and manufacturer are similar in their painting requirements and material used. The main difference is that the aerospace feeder will have many more colors in stock due to the fact that they supply multiple manufacturers. Some feeder plants may use up to 60 different colors in one day. The aerospace manufacturer can use up to 30 gallons of primer each day and 30 gallons of topcoat per day. The primers are generally 2K and the topcoats can be 2K, but 3K are more common. In humid environments solvent is used to increase the potlife time. Military bases have the same needs as commercial airlines, where touchup and repainting is required. The important thing to know about selling to the military is that it is essential to speak their language. For instance, you do not want to call on the purchasing manager--in the military this person is called the procurement officer. c. The Kitting Environment A typical manufacturer may run two shifts and have 5 to 15 painters per paint kitchen. There generally will be a paint crib attendant who will mix the batches for primer and color. These painters will get batches anywhere from 4 oz. to 5 gallons, but a typical batch will be a pint or quart. The problem is that when hand mixing is done by the paint crib attendant the batch sizes are generally larger and paint is often wasted due to expired pot life from too much material being mixed that amounts to at least 10% of the batches. Also, there is a delay when the production shift starts and the painters are waiting for the kits to be made. It is common to see painters waiting in line for 15 to 30 minutes. The result is lost production time and unwanted socializing. A painter will come to the paint kitchen 4 to 5 times per night. Another problem that was discovered is that with so many different material suppliers, there are also many different catalysts. It was found that when painters were making their own batches from kits, they often used the wrong catalyst, because they did not understand that there could be a different catalyst for each paint. When bad parts need to be reworked it is a tremendous cost to the manufacturer in terms of lost production. Wasted paint is expensive. Not only is the cost of the paint being incurred at a minimum of $50 per gallon, but there is also a cost associated to disposing of this unused paint that can amount to as much as $1,500 per 55 gallon drum. Average Average Daily Average Weekly Bad Paint Type Paint Cost Paint Waste Mixes Primer- Urethane $50 to $60/gal. 10% 5% Primer – Deft $100/gal. 25% 5% to 10% Top Coat $50 to $300/gal. 10% 5% PTFE $200/gal. 10% 5% Empty paint cans from kitting also is considered hazardous waste and must be disposed of appropriately. An aerospace company is required to wash out the cans, dry it and contain it in hazardous material containers, often 55-gallon drums. These drums are then shipped to hazardous locations at a hefty fee, along with a separate drum that contains the solvent used to wash out the cans. One manufacturer stated that they would have an eight month ROI on the ProBatch just from the cost of eliminating the labor and cost of washing and disposing of the cans. Every plant is reviewing their environmental emissions. The current method of recording solvent usage is by the amount of solvent that is left in inventory at the end of the month. The more wasted paint, the more solvent that needs to be reported. III. Graco Solution The solution to this wasteful process is to use the ProBatch, electronic batch dispensing system. This weight-based product is a cost-effective solution to the kitting process. ProBatch uses a scale to measure the exact amount of material required to make the perfect mixture every time. ProBatch offers the range of dispenses from as low as 4 oz. to 5 gallons. The system can handle up to 99 fluids, 6 maximum for automatic dispenses and 93 for manual adds. A total of 250 recipes can be programmed into the ProBatch through screen inputs or through PrecisionView AMR 2.0. The typical return on investment (ROI) for the ProBatch will range from 1 to 10 months. The benefits of the ProBatch in the aerospace industry is that it: 1. Improves Paint Quality 2. Reduces the Amount of Waste 3. Improves Production by Reducing Painter’s Down Time 4. Eliminates the use of Can Disposal 5. Reduces the Overall Disposal Cost 6. Frees Up Paint Crib/Kitchen Staff to Work on Other Projects/Tasks 7. Keeps the Material Fresh 8. Reduce VOC Costs When the ProBatch was introduced at Raytheon Aircraft Company in Witchta, KS, they were having bad batches on 10% of their hand mixed kits. When they installed the ProBatch and initially only dispensed the primer, they virtually eliminated their bad batches. The top coats that were not switched were still experiencing the 10% failure rate. How to Reach the Customer To find the right person at an aerospace company can be tricky, but the best person to contact is as follows. Company Best First Contact Aerospace Manufacturers Research and Development Environmental Person Aerospace Feeders President Paint Foreman/Supervisor Commercial Airlines Research and Development Environmental Person Military Procurement Officer, Corrosion Officers (Corrosion Control Department) or environmental engineers Focus on primer and only major colors, the ProBatch is not a tinting machine. IV. Return on Investment for Aerospace Customer The ProBatch system is an ROI sale. Most companies look for a return on their investment within one year, which in most cases is obtainable even with the feed system.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Digital Thread: Reducing Electrical Systems Program Risk in the Aerospace Industry
    Siemens Digital Industries Software The digital thread: Reducing electrical systems program risk in the aerospace industry Executive summary As we enter a new era in aerospace development, it’s becoming abundantly clear how digital technologies such as the digital twin and digital thread are helping OEMs revolutionize how things are done across the entire product life cycle. This paper explores the many challenges aerospace OEMs and suppliers face today and how the model-based enterprise (MBE) lowers system program risk and delivers new avenues of innovation in electrical and electronic content platforms. siemens.com/electrical-systems White paper | The digital thread: Reducing electrical systems program risk in the aerospace industry Contents Introduction ............................................................. 3 Platforms are becoming more electrical .................. 4 Increased complexity means greater potential for failure ................................................................. 5 The industry is ready for an historic disruption ............................................... 6 The emergence of the digital twin and the digital thread .............................................. 7 The digital twin of product, production and performance ..................................................... 8 Capital: The electrical digital twin and digital thread .................................................... 9 De-risking key integration milestones: How Capital is helping today ................................. 11 Conclusion ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Aerospace & Defense Manufacturing in Tijuana and Mexico
    2016 Aerospace & Defense Manufacturing in Tijuana and Mexico Advantages of Nearshoring in Mexico, Key Highlights and 2016 Industry Overview WHITE PAPER By Co-Production International, Inc. 05/29/2016 Co-Production International www.co-production.net May 2016 WHY ARE SECTION 1 AEROSPACE Mexico: Hub for Aerospace & Defense Manufacturing MANUFACTURERS Mexico grew from third in 2012 and is now ranked first for lowest business costs according to the annual KPMG EXPANDING TO Competitive Alternatives: Guide to International Business Location Costs 2016.1 Valued at $7 billion in 2014, Mexico’s aerospace and defense exports highlight a significant market MEXICO? 17 trend for country’s rapidly growing industries. Mexico has rapidly become a top global destination Mexico is home to more than 289 aerospace manufacturing for aerospace and defense manufacturing. The entire facilities and a 34,000 strong, highly-skilled direct industry California and Baja California is known as the “Aerospace workforce. The state of Baja California, especially the border Megaregion,” with the global manufacturing hub of Tijuana region, has become a growing global center for the industry boasting an over 50 year-old history in aerospace and now attracts the largest share of companies in all of manufacturing activities.2 Executives and trade Mexico. organizations cite major cost savings and ease of doing business benefits in Mexico, including: From temporary imports for assembly to full production operations and special processing, Baja California is known • Low-Cost,
    [Show full text]
  • Aerospace Manufacturing a Growth Leader in Georgia
    Aerospace Manufacturing A Growth Leader in Georgia In this study: 9. Research Universities 10. GTRI and GTMI 1. Industry Snapshot 11. High-Tech Talent 3. A Top Growth Leader 12. Centers of Innovation 4. Industry Mix 13. World-Class Training Programs 6. Industry Wages and Occupational 15. Strong Partnerships and Ready Workforce Employment 16. Transportation Infrastructure 7. Pro-Business State 17. Powering Your Manufacturing Facility Community and Economic Development 8. Unionization 18. Aerospace Companies Aerospace Manufacturing A Growth Leader in Georgia Aerospace is defined as Aerospace Products and Parts Manufacturing as well as Other Support Activities for Air Transportation. Aerospace Georgia is the ideal home for aerospace include Pratt & Whitney’s expansion in companies with ¨¦§75 ¨¦§575 25+ employees companies. With the world’s most traveled Columbus in both 2016 and 2017, Meggitt «¬400 ¨¦§85 ¨¦§985 airport, eight regional airports, prominent Polymers & Composites’ expansion in military bases and accessibility to the Rockmart and MSB Group’s location in ¨¦§20 ¨¦§20 country’s fastest-growing major port, Savannah. For a complete list of new major ¨¦§85 Georgia’s aerospace industry serves a locations and expansions, see page 2. ¨¦§185 global marketplace. Georgia is also home to a highly-skilled workforce and world- ¨¦§16 Why Georgia for Aerospace? class technical expertise geared toward promoting the success of the aerospace • Highly skilled workers ¨¦§75 ¨¦§95 industry. Georgia’s business climate is • World-class technical expertise consistently ranked as one of the best • Renowned workforce training program in the country, with a business-friendly tax code and incentives that encourage • Increasing number of defense manufacturing growth for existing and personnel newly arriving companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington Aerospace Economic Impacts 2018 Update
    Washington Aerospace Economic Impacts 2018 Update December 2018 Prepared for: Prepared by: Community Attributes Inc. tells data-rich stories about communities that are important to decision makers. President & CEO Chris Mefford Project Manager Spencer Cohen, PhD Analysts Doudou Feng Madalina Calen Carrie Schaden Community Attributes Inc. 1411 Fourth Ave, Suite 1401 Seattle, Washington 98101 www.communityattributes.com This page was intentionally left blank. C ONTENT S Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 Summary of Findings ...................................................................................................... 1 Methods and Data ........................................................................................................... 2 Direct Activities in Washington State ............................................................................. 3 Employment, Occupations, and Establishments .......................................................... 3 Wages ........................................................................................................................... 6 Business Revenues ....................................................................................................... 8 Economic and Fiscal Impacts ..................................................................................... 10 Aerospace Across the State ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reach for the Skies: a Strategic Vision for UK Aerospace
    Reach for the skies A Strategic Vision for UK Aerospace The Aerospace Growth Partnership Industry and Government working together to secure the future for UK aerospace Industry and Government working together to secure the future for UK aerospace Prime Minister’s Foreword BritaiN HAS A PROUD RECORD OF AEROspaCE ACHIEVEMENTS, from the invention of the jet engine to making the wings on the largest commercial aircraft in service today. Our industry is the largest in Europe; a direct employer of more than 100,000 people; and a powerhouse in the UK economy, with a turnover of more than £20 billion a year. It is, quite simply, a phenomenal success story. But there must be no complacency. The huge potential in the global market – for trillions of pounds worth of new orders in less than twenty years – means that competitors around the world are investing and preparing the ground today. Britain must show the same foresight. That’s what the Aerospace Growth Partnership is all about. We heard from industry that you wanted long-term commitment from government, without long-term hassle and interference. So the partnership was born; a chance for those in Whitehall to work with those in business to tackle the challenges facing UK aerospace. The group has been looking at what technologies, skills and supply chain changes we need to make – not just to retain our position in the market but to build on it. This report is just the start. We will return with a fuller strategy at the end of year – and beyond that, we are determined to work hand-in-glove with industry to keep UK aerospace flying high.
    [Show full text]
  • Curtis M. Dombek
    Curtis M. Dombek Partner T: +32.(0)2.290.7902 (BR) IT Tower / +1.213.617.5595 (LA) Avenue Louise 480 [email protected] 1050 Brussels Curt Dombek is a partner in the Government Contracts, Investigations and International Trade Practice Group. Curt divides his time between the firm's Brussels and Los Angeles offices. Areas of Practice Curt has practiced since 1983 in the field of international trade and regulation. He advises clients on civilian and military export controls, trade sanctions and blocking orders, customs matters, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the USA Patriot Act, Free Trade Agreements, CFIUS reviews of foreign investment in the United States, Made in USA and Buy American regulations, FAA and international regulation of unmanned aircraft and the anti-boycott regulations. He handles export control compliance and other international matters for multinationals in the telecommunications, computer hardware and software, aerospace and defense, automotive, energy, pharmaceutical, chemical, electronics and fashion and apparel industries. Curt has designed international compliance programs and advised on complex questions of international compliance for companies with operations throughout the U.S. and the European Union as well as in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. Assisting companies in complying with the detailed export controls on encryption and telecommunications technology is a significant part of his practice, as is the regulatory compliance relevant to cross-border R&D programs. He has significant experience with the regulation of emerging unmanned aircraft, UAS and eVTOL. Curt has represented clients in many high-profile international trade cases. In Kuwait, he represented the Kuwait government in the preparation and submission of its Gulf War claims to the United Nations Compensation Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Artificial Intelligence the Next Digital Frontier?
    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THE NEXT DIGITAL FRONTIER? DISCUSSION PAPER JUNE 2017 Jacques Bughin | Brussels Eric Hazan | Paris Sree Ramaswamy | Washington, DC Michael Chui | San Francisco Tera Allas | London Peter Dahlström | London Nicolaus Henke | London Monica Trench | London Since its founding in 1990, the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) has sought to develop a deeper understanding of the evolving global economy. As the business and economics research arm of McKinsey & Company, MGI aims to provide leaders in the commercial, public, and social sectors with the facts and insights on which to base management and policy decisions. The Lauder Institute at the University of Pennsylvania ranked MGI the world’s number-one private-sector think tank in its 2016 Global Think Tank Index for the second consecutive year. MGI research combines the disciplines of economics and management, employing the analytical tools of economics with the insights of business leaders. Our “micro-to-macro” methodology examines microeconomic industry trends to better understand the broad macroeconomic forces affecting business strategy and public policy. MGI’s in-depth reports have covered more than 20 countries and 30 industries. Current research focuses on six themes: productivity and growth, natural resources, labor markets, the evolution of global financial markets, the economic impact of technology and innovation, and urbanization. Recent reports have assessed the economic benefits of tackling gender inequality, a new era of global competition, Chinese innovation, and digital globalization. MGI is led by four McKinsey and Company senior partners: Jacques Bughin, James Manyika, Jonathan Woetzel, and Frank Mattern, MGI’s chairman. Michael Chui, Susan Lund, Anu Madgavkar, Sree Ramaswamy, and Jaana Remes serve as MGI partners.
    [Show full text]
  • Dot / Faa /Tc-16/57
    DOT/FAA/TC-16/57 Commercial Off-The-Shelf Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center Airborne Electronic Hardware Aviation Research Division Atlantic City International Airport Issues and Emerging Solutions: New Jersey 08405 Authority for Expenditure No. 75 Report September 2017 Final Report This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information Services (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161. This document is also available from the Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center at actlibrary.tc.faa.gov. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the funding agency. This document does not constitute FAA policy. Consult the FAA sponsoring organization listed on the Technical Documentation page as to its use. This report is available at the Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center’s Full-Text Technical Reports page: actlibrary.tc.faa.gov in Adobe Acrobat portable document format (PDF). Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. DOT/FAA/TC-16/57 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date COMMERCIAL OFF-THE-SHELF AIRBORNE ELECTRONIC HARDWARE ISSUES AND September 2017 EMERGING SOLUTIONS: AUTHORIZATION FOR EXPENDITURE NO.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Aerospace Supply Chain Study
    BIS RESEARCH PAPER NUMBER 294 UK Aerospace Supply Chain Study JULY 2016 Contents Contents ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 12 Context ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Scope of the Study .................................................................................................................... 14 Methodology overview ............................................................................................................... 14 Structure and Value of the Supply Chain .................................................................................. 16 Primes views ............................................................................................................................. 16 Supply chain view ..................................................................................................................... 18 Participant company overview ............................................................................................... 18 Employment .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Greenness of Stimulus Index
    February 2021 Greenness of Stimulus Index An assessment of COVID-19 stimulus by G20 countries and other major economies in relation to climate action and biodiversity goals • Addition of the Nordic countries Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden to the index. Greenness • An increase in the total quantity of measured stimulus to US$14.9 trillion, from US$13.0 trillion. of Stimulus This increase is driven by the United States’ US$900 billion bipartisan stimulus bill signed into law in Index December, Japan’s December US$606 billion stimulus, and the United Kingdom’s US$71 billion The Greenness of Stimulus Index (GSI) assesses new stimulus package. There were also increases the effectiveness of the COVID-19 stimulus efforts in stimulus packages in France (US$587 billion to by G20 countries and ten other nations in ensuring US$612 billion), Australia (US$176 billion to US$188 an economic recovery that takes advantage of billion), Russia (US$117 billion to USS$129 billion), sustainable growth opportunities, and builds Italy (US$564 billion to US$574 billion), Canada resilience through the protection of the climate (from US$391 billion to US$400 billion), Germany and biodiversity. (by US$5 billion), India (by US$2 billion), and Turkey (by US$1 billion), plus the addition of the five new It provides a method to gauge the current impact Nordic countries (US$176 billion total). of the COVID-19 responses, to track countries’ progress over time, and to identify and recom- • Improvements to some index scores. Notably, the mend measures for improving the effectiveness United States and Canada have dramatically improved, of those responses.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Competitiveness of the Us Aviation Industry
    S. HRG. 112–850 THE GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS OF THE U.S. AVIATION INDUSTRY: ADDRESSING COMPETITION ISSUES TO MAINTAIN U.S. LEADERSHIP IN THE AEROSPACE MARKET HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND SECURITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JULY 18, 2012 Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 86–665 PDF WASHINGTON : 2014 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:35 Feb 19, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 S:\GPO\DOCS\86665.TXT JACKIE SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas, Ranking JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine BARBARA BOXER, California JIM DEMINT, South Carolina BILL NELSON, Florida JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia MARK PRYOR, Arkansas ROY BLUNT, Missouri CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania TOM UDALL, New Mexico MARCO RUBIO, Florida MARK WARNER, Virginia KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire MARK BEGICH, Alaska DEAN HELLER, Nevada ELLEN L. DONESKI, Staff Director JAMES REID, Deputy Staff Director JOHN WILLIAMS, General Counsel RICHARD M.
    [Show full text]
  • Job Skills Program, 2011 Annual Report
    2011 Job Skills Program Report to the Legislature December 2011 State Board for Community and Technical Colleges Workforce Education Department 1300 Quince St SE; P.O. Box 42495 Olympia, WA 98504-2495 306-704-4400 www.sbctc.edu Table of Contents Preface ................................................................................................................................ 1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 2-4 Program Overview ........................................................................................................... 5-7 About the Job Skills Program .................................................................................. 5 Up Skill / Back Fill .................................................................................................... 5 Economic Development........................................................................................... 5 Job Skills Priorities ................................................................................................... 6 Shared Investments ................................................................................................. 6 Transferable Skills ................................................................................................... 6 Workforce Training Customer Advisory Committee ............................................... 7 Partnerships and Collaborative Efforts ..................................................................
    [Show full text]