1. Team T3 (#3)
Tom Lastoskie
Lead

2. Team Members Tom Lastoskie – AFIT Gary Stanley – Ctr AFRL
Ian McCammon – L3 Tech.
Brenda Wesp – Lockheed Martin
Jason Schmidt – Boeing
Andy Davis – Army CERDEC
Kevin Brower – Army CERDEC
Robert Arthur – DAU
Chad Lavos – BAE Systems
Ryan Halsey – BAE Systems
Mike Deitchman – Ctr, ONR
Thomas Fiorino – APT Corp.

3. Feedback on Recommended Manufacturing & Quality Assurance RFP Inputs
Team Assessment of Recommended RFP Inputs
Is this item value added: Yes!
Suggested changes:
Para 1.2 – all AQMS, instead of just AS9100 ©
Pg 2 – FAI; Check in O & S box ©
Pg 2 – 3 lines indented 1 space (A)
Pg 2 – Mfg Modeling and Simulation: Check in TMRR box ©
Pg 2 – Define what the ckeckmarks mean e.g., “recommended Best Practice”
Pg 3 – remove PRR and use “all major technical reviews”
Pg 3 – remove “Society of…”
Pg 3, Para 1.2 – first “and” to “and/or”

4. Feedback on Recommended Manufacturing & Quality Assurance RFP Inputs
Team Assessment of Recommended RFP Inputs
Is this item value added: Yes!
Suggested changes:
Pg 4 – “implement mfg maturation plans” needs to be updated in Deskbook language and match to this effort
Pg 4, para 1.3 – Add “The prime contractor shall host a government Mfg Readiness Level Assessment.”
Pg 4 – Throughout document remove “Tailored” in box to “X” (A)
Pg 4 – para 1.3 – status of “mitigation plans’ to “manufacturing readiness”
Pg 5 – Remove “As a minimum,” Metrics may include, but are not limited to, ….”
Pg 5 – spell out MRB
Pg 5 – remove submit “monthly”
Pg 5, Para 1.4 – remove last sentence
Pg 5, Suggested DID, remove require “on-line” access

5. Feedback on Recommended Manufacturing & Quality Assurance RFP Inputs
Team Assessment of Recommended RFP Inputs
Is this item value added: Yes!
Suggested changes:
Pg 6 – to “the contractor’s suppliers”
General – use the term “suppliers” throughout
Pg 6 – last sentence shall “make available”
Pg 6 – delete semicolon “AS5553, Coun… Parts,”
Pg 6 – use “embedded”
We need to add a paragraph about FAT (6.5.7 in AS6500)
Pg 7 – block for O & S “X”’d
Pg 7, Para 1.7 – remove two periods

6. Feedback on Recommended Manufacturing & Quality Assurance RFP Inputs
Team Assessment of Recommended RFP Inputs
Is this item value added: Yes! Confirm
Suggested changes:
Pg 8, Para 1.8 – Remove second sentence
Pg 8 – remove “A follow-on ….”
Pg 9 – consider adding AS9103 as a new paragraph under 2.0
Pg 9 – first sentence constraints “and” confirm …
Pg 9, para 2.2 – new para “M&S in accordance with AS Shall statement for report
General: Instead of restating items already addressed by AS6500. Paragraph(s) only call out reports (for DID purposes).

7. Workshop Feedback Questions to Answer 1
Working:
Seeing traction is use of MRLs
Cultural change is happening
MRL website is great
Not working:
More user friendly place to learn about the MRL process

8. Workshop Feedback Questions to Answer 2
MRL process better:
MRL education (market segment analysis)
Availability for practitioners
Availability for PMs, etc
Availability for process owners
MRL process more efficient:
Users Guide updated to reflect MRL Deskbook

9. Workshop Feedback Questions to Answer 3
MRL WG 2019 efforts:
How do we engage executives on importance of MRLs
How do people get good training/education
Develop list of candidates for Quality and Manufacturing metrics by Product Life Cycle Phase

10. Overall Feedback on Workshop
Team Assessment of workshop (comments/suggestions)
Valuable
Networking within/outside DoD
Discussions between industry/DoD
Try to get more variety with industry participation
Remember - this process is for all US industry
Editing of ideas at workshop is valuable
Synopsis of attendees provided before Workshop

11. Summary