DLMSO January 30, 1997

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: Defense Logistics Management Standards (DLMS) Supply

Process Review Committee (PRC) Meeting, January 6-10,

1997

Purpose: The Defense Logistics Management Standards Office

(DLMSO) hosted a Supply PRC meeting on January 6-10, 1997, at the

Headquarters Complex, Ft. Belvoir, VA. The primary focus of this

meeting was DLMS implementation convention (IC) review. 

Additional discussion topics included validation of Force or

Activity Designator (F/AD) I activities and use of DD Form 

1348-2, Issue Release/Receipt Document with Address Label. The

agenda is shown at Enclosure 1. A list of attendees is shown at

Enclosure 2. 

Brief Summary of Discussion: Ms. Ellen Hilert and Ms. Mary

Jane Johnson, Supply PRC Co-Chairs, and Ms. Vermella Saváge,

MILSTRIP System Administrator, provided opening remarks and

reviewed the meeting agenda.

Review of November Agenda Items:

a. AMCLs 11 (MILSTRIP) and 15 (MILSTRAP), Expanded

Materiel Receipt Acknowledgment (MRA) Procedures . DLMSO will

initiate clarification of MILSTEP reporting requirements and will

review the MILSTRIP ASH transaction format to verify proper

identification of the customer RIC (DAASC vs ICP).

b. Proposed DLMS Change 1, DD Form 1348-1B, Issue

Release/Receipt Document, and DD Form 1348-2A, Issue

Release/Receipt Document with Address Label. The Services/

Agencies were reminded that they must provide comments/

concurrences to DLMSO. 

c. PMC 40, Processing Cooperative Logistics Supply

Support Arrangement (CLSSA) Requisitions. DLMSO will release the

Approved Change in accordance with Service/Agency agreements

reached at the November PRC meeting.

d. AMC 41, Defense Program for Redistribution of

Assets (DEPRA) Follow-up Timeframes. DLMSO will issue an
2

addendum to identify the DEPRA processing actions when denial

status is received during the 30-day period after which the RDO

was created and to indicate the original intent of the proposed

change to eliminate CB status to the customer by DEPRA when

passing the requisition to the ICP/IMM for processing. [This

Approved Change will carry a revised numerical designation upon

release.]

January Agenda Items:

a. Video Training Session. The meeting began with a

video-taped training session conducted by Mr. Harry Featherstone,

Logistics Management Institute. Upon request, DLMSO will loan a

copy of the 4-hour program to the Services/Agencies.

b. DD Form 1348-2, Issue Release/Receipt Document with

Address Label. 

Action: The MILSTRIP System Administrator will clarify current

procedures regarding the interchangeability of the 1348-1A with

the 1348-2 and the authority to use the 1348-2 without preprinted

postage data on the attached address label.

c. Implementation Convention (IC) Review. The

following ICs were presented to the Committee. 

(1) TS 517 (LS18) Material Obligation Validation

(2) TS 517 (LS45) Government Furnished Material

Validation

(3) TS 867 (LS49) Issue

(4) TS 846 (LS54) Asset Reclassification

(5) TS 830 (LS47) War Material Requirements

Action: Based upon Component comments, the above ICs will be

updated and represented to the PRC prior to submission to the

Logistics Functional Work Group (LFWG). Additional ICs

originally scheduled for presentation at the January PRC meeting

will be rescheduled for March. 

DLMS Logistics Data Manager (LDM).

Action: Some changes recommended by the Supply PRC are

applicable to other functional areas. It was proposed by the CoChairs that the LDM address global changes: 
3

1. Point of Contact (Segment PER/G61). Revise the

implementation note for data element 365 to indicate that entries

not include blank spaces, dashes, or parentheses. Add the

abbreviation “(FAX)” after the word “facsimile” in the

implementation code note for qualifier FX. This is for

clarification since the term “FAX” is more commonly used and

understood by most people. Delete qualifier FT (Federal

Telecommunications System (FTS)) as unnecessary. FTS numbers are

the same as commercial numbers. Add “and extension, if

applicable” at the end of the note for qualifier TE (Telephone).

2. Quantity. Most data entries for quantities include a

note which reads: “For example, if the quantity is 20, cite only

20.” It was agreed that this note does not have any significant

meaning and should be removed.

3. Universal Time Coordinate (UTC). Fix all beginning

segment notes to state that this is the date “ that corresponds”

to the UTC. This language would eliminate confusion concerning

how a date can be expressed as a time.

4. Override Notes. Fix N1 override notes to exclude

override for the “to” address.

5. Multiple To Addressing. DLMSO must establish rules

concerning use of multiple iterations of the N1 loop with more

than one TO address. 

d. Approved DLSS/DLMS Change 9, Validation of F/AD I

Activities. This change establishes an automated process which

will automatically validate F/AD I usage. A table of authorized

activity DoD Activity Address Codes (DoDAACs) will be maintained

by the DSDC/Defense Automatic Addressing System Center (DAASC)

for the purpose of automatically downgrading the requisition

priority of those requisitions which do not pass validation. At

the November PRC meeting, the Components expressed serious

concerns about pursing implementation. Most troubling were fears

that off-station high-priority requisitions would not pass the

edits and that procedures were not in-place to accommodate a

quick response to authorization changes. DLMSO prepared a fact

sheet for ADUSD (L/MDM) requesting additional time to resolve

issues (Enclosure 3). In response, the Components were directed

to provide compelling rational for delaying implementation and

propose a realistic timeline. Open discussion during the PRC

meeting clarified concerns and procedural issues which must be

resolved prior to full implementation (Enclosure 4). Mr. Vitko,

DLA, recommended an alternative approach which would institute

the edit validation at DAASC without actually downgrading the

priority of unmatched requisitions. During a transition period,
4

the results of the edit would be output to a report. This will

provide a solid basis for further analysis. All in attendance

supported the alternative.

Action: To help assess the extent of abuse, DAASC will match

priority 1/4/11 requisitions against the 1995 Component-validated

authorized F/AD I DoDAACs, selecting a three-month period from

historical data. A working meeting was scheduled for January 21,

1997 to review initial DAASC findings and develop a report

format. The transition period is scheduled to begin April 1,

1997. 

January 21, 1997 Meeting: Ms. Hilert informed those present (Air

Force, Marine Corps, and DLA) that an ADUSD(L/MDM) letter had

been prepared for Mr Emahiser’s signature recommending that we

proceed with the alternative procedure. Summary output of the

DAASC inquiry was distributed and discussed (Enclosure 5). The

findings indicate that during the last quarter of 1996 there were

45,445 requisitions processed through DAASC with a priority

designator of 1, 4, or 11 which do not include an authorized

DoDAAC. It is not initially evident whether the lack of a recent

audit of F/AD I activities seriously impacted the results of the

inquiry. Research to determine and correct the cause for

mismatches involving a handful of high-volume Air Force

requisitioners (1,000 - 7,000 requisitions/quarter) should

significantly improve future findings. Also of interest, was the

wide variety of types of DoDAACs found, including not only

Service activities, but FMS, contractors, the Coast Guard and

several civil agencies. A disk containing detail transactions

will be provided to the Services so that they may proceed with

the necessary research. A draft format for the DAASC report for

the transition period was developed (Enclosure 6). 

Action: Components should review the draft format and provide

comments/concurrence to DLMSO. Once approved, DAASC will begin

the programming effort. DAASC should determine whether

transition period results should be based upon requisition edit

or a quarterly inquiry. If feasible, DAASC should use the new

report formats with current quarter requisitions to expedite

research of mismatches. The Components must provide the

names/offices of individuals responsible for forwarding activity

changes to DAASC. The Components should make an effort to update

both the Joint Staff list of authorized activities and the

corresponding DAASC list. For background information, Enclosure

7 provides the applicable JCS Instruction and the Joint Staff

cover letter used to conduct the 1995 audit of F/AD I

assignments.
5

Security Classification Issue: Subsequent to the January 21,

1997 meeting, it became apparent that the classification of F/AD

I information would present a greater problem than previously

realized. In reviewing the background information requested by

the meeting attendees, Ms. Hilert noted that the cover letter

clearly states that the identification of an activity as F/AD I

is CONFIDENTIAL. Mr. Trepal has agreed to initiate inquiries and

pursue declassification if appropriate. The Committee will be

informed of progress.

e. Additional Discussion Topics:

(1) DLMS Baseline. The ICs published in the

current DLMS manual are written in American National Standards

Institute, Version 003050. Questions concerning the establishing

a baseline for the DLMS were addressed. The Committee is

currently reviewing ICs in the 003060 Version. However, Version

003070 will be released very shortly. A definitive answer is not

available at this time.

(2) Planning for DLMS Implementation. The first

meeting of the Logistics Information Board (LIB) DLMS-sponsored

Working Group on Implementation Planning has been scheduled for

January 14, 1997 (Enclosure 8). Committee members were asked to

forward some of their concerns about funding, training, and

implementation to their LIB/LIB Work Group representatives. 

(3) DLMS Configuration Control. The Committee

expressed concern with the numbering system currently employed

for proposed and approved changes to the DLSS/DLMS. Improvements

were recommended. Plans for an on-line configuration control

system appear to be on hold. However, future plans for the DLMSO

web site do include posting of such changes. Additionally, a

listing of all DLMS changes is maintained within DLMSO and will

be made available to the PRC. 

Action: DLMSO will look into including identification of the

functional area impacted within the title of the DLSS/DLMS

changes. Changes will be numbered consecutively by functional

area eliminating confusion about skipped change numbers. DLMSO

will advise the Committee of changes to the numbering and

configuration control system status at the next meeting.

(4) DLMSO Home Page. The Committee recommended

expanding the use of the Internet web site to include minutes of

meetings and updates to the hard-copy listing on IC status. 

DLMSO is determining the feasibility of this. Instructions for

accessing the home page are shown at Enclosure 9.
6

(5) March Supply PRC Meeting. The next scheduled

meeting will be held at Ft. Belvoir on March 10-14, 1997. 

 /s/

ELLEN HILERT __________________

Supply PRC Co-Chair

 /s/

MARY JANE JOHNSON ___________________ 

Supply PRC Co-Chair

 /s/ 

VERMELLA SAVÁGE ___________________ 

MILSTRIP System Administrator

 /s/

AL HENDERSON ___________________ 

DLMSO Action Officer

 /s/

DON COLLINS ____________________ 

DLMSO Action Officer

APPROVE: /s/

JAMES A. JOHNSON ____________________

Director, DLMSO

Enclosures
1

FACT SHEET

SUBJECT: Request for Extension on Implementation of Approved DLSS/DLMS Change 9,

Validation of Force or Activity Designator (F/AD) I Activities 

BACKGROUND:

o This change establishes an automated process which will automatically validate F/AD I usage. A

table of authorized activity DoDAACs will be maintained by the Defense Automatic Addressing

System Center (DAASC) for the purpose of automatically downgrading the requisition priority of

those requisitions which do not pass edit. 

o August 27, 1996. Under ADUSD (L/MDM) direction, DLMSO hosted a Supply Process Review

Committee (PRC) Meeting to discuss deficiencies in existing procedures and practice. Components

expressed concern for the proposed DAASC validation process, but agree to move forward.

o October 10, 1996. DLMSO issued the Proposed Change for Component review with a 30 day

comment period. The Services did not provide official comment within the allotted time.

o November 13, 1996. DLMSO issued Approved Change with ADUSD directed effective date of

December 6, 1996.

o November 18-22, 1996. DLMSO hosted a Supply PRC Meeting. Agenda included

implementation status of Approved Change. Components restated concerns/nonconcurrence as

indicated below.

DISCUSSION:

o PRC Members expressed great concern that the process as defined will adversely impact logistics

operations. 

o It is feared that the proposed system will not be able to provide a quick response for emergency

changes in F/ADs resulting in downgrading of requisitions for critically needed material. The change

would require advance coordination by operations personnel not normally responsible for supply

system maintenance. Routine situations, such as non-mission capable aircraft requiring repair parts

to be requisitioned by other than the authorized F/AD I home base, may cause delays in obtaining the

parts. 

o Potential need for table updates outside DAASC’s normal hours of operation are not addressed.

o Internal Service procedures are not adequately addressed.
2

o Only the Navy has provided a Point of Contact to DAASC for identifying authorized activities. 

o The Services have not provided DoDAACs of approved F/AD I activities for building the

DAASC edit table.

CONCLUSION: The planned implementation date cannot be met. Based upon the above

discussion, DLMSO agreed to initiate action with ADUSD (L/MDM) to delay the scheduled

implementation. DLMSO requested that the Components provide supporting documentation as soon

as possible. Letters received thus far are attached (Attachment 1 & 2). A Supply PRC Meeting is

scheduled for January 6-10, 1996. Components will be requested to determine appropriate Points of

Contact and arrive with recommendations for improving the process.

RECOMMENDATION: A 90 day extension should be granted to resolve Component concerns,

expand DLSS/DLMS procedures to correct deficiencies, develop corresponding Service procedures

to support the change, and provide wide dissemination of changes. 

APPROVED: ______________________

COORDINATION: ____________________

Ellen Hilert/DLMSO/767-6117/12-10-96

Attachments
3

document: q/work_in fad.wpd

action officer: Hilert

12/4/96

MFR: Faxed to Terry Trepal, DUSD (L/MDM), 12/4/96 for review and possible action. 

coord: ______________ J. Johnson (has seen and approved for forwarding 12/4/96)

 ______________ P. Brittingham

 ______________ K Naber
1 Encl 4 

Validation of Force or Activity Designator (F/AD) I Activities

Discussion Summary Notes - PRC Meeting, January 10, 1997

Component expressed concerns in the following areas:

1. Verification of Need: Although there is a wide perception of

abuse, there is no positive evidence specific to F/AD I. 

a. Unknown volume/source of abuse. 

b. Accuracy of authorized DoDAACs maintained by Joint Staff

J4 uncertain after initial validation. Infrequent update cycle

(last update 1995).

2. Possible Misplaced Focus: Crucial need to update F/AD I and

UMIPS definitions. Need further examination of process and

completion of on-going projects before attempting corrective

action. Larger problem enforcing appropriate use of F/AD II and

III.

3. Classification Questions: The current secret classification

for the J4 list pertains only to the aggregate of information

which includes both the activities and the associated projects

which are authorized to use F/AD I. This classification is not

applicable to the validation process which is based upon DoDAAC

alone. [Subsequent to the meeting, it was found that “The fact

that units are FAD I is CONFIDENTIAL.” per Joint Staff

memorandum, September 13, 1995.] 

4. Authorized Points of Contact (POC): Under Approved Change 9,

Services are to provide POCs responsible for providing DAASC with

changes to the F/AD I Authorized list.

a. Should J4 be the authorized POC for all Services/

Agencies? 

 

b. Who will serve as the POC for civil agencies, foreign

governments, others?

c. Within the Services, who should be the POC? Alternate

POC? By name or by office?

5. Off-Station Requisitions: Support location DoDAACs generally

appear in the requisition transaction rather than the authorized

F/AD I activity DoDAAC. Major roadblock?

a. Local automated systems may preclude use of outside

DoDAACs.
2

b. Inclusion of the requisition Project Code could increase

flexibility of validation criteria. 

6. Rapid Response: Procedures are not in place to expedite

changes.

a. Process may be time-consuming (finding and notifying the

right people).

b. Must establish procedures for DAASC duty officer.

7. Foreign Military Sales: During certain situations, foreign

governments may be authorized use of F/AD I. Current procedures

do not allow for validation by foreign countries.

8. Addendum to Approved Change 9: Must modify language to

specify transactions types validated (A0_, AM_, AT_, A3_, A4_). 

Also, must address acceptable means of communication (voice, 

e-mail, letter backup?). Procedures must be enhanced based upon

transition period and to reflect DAASC report. 

9. Requisitioning without DAASC Validation: DESEX, Internet,

and direct phone calls to supply source bypass DAASC. Need to

assess impact. Use status transactions to pinpoint possible

abuse.

 
Encl 

SAMPLE FORMATS

FORCE OR ACTIVITY DESIGNATOR (F/AD) I VARIANCE REPORT

REPORT PERIOD: JANUARY 1, 1997 - MARCH 31, 1997

PART I - SERVICE/AGENCY SUMMARY

MILITARY SERVICE NO. OF NO. OF

DODAACS REQUISITIONS

ARMY 100 2,505

NAVY 600 8,009

AIR FORCE 500 XX,XXX

MARINE CORPS 75 XXX

AGENCY/OTHER

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION XX XX

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY X X

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE X X

GRAND TOTAL: XX,XXX XXX,XXX

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Report includes DI Codes: A0_, AM_, AT_, A3_, A4_.
FORCE OR ACTIVITY DESIGNATOR (F/AD) I VARIANCE REPORT

REPORT PERIOD: JANUARY 1, 1997 - MARCH 31, 1997

PART II - DODAAC SUMMARY BY SERVICE/AGENCY

ARMY

DODAAC REQUISITION PD 01 PD 04 PD 11

NO. OF 

S

GRAND TOTAL 

100

2,505 50 100 100

W12345 150 1 119 30

WXXXX 60 5 55 0

Continues displaying all Army activities, includes Army contractor and Army FMS).

 Sorted in descending order by number of requisitions.

 DoDAACs are taken from the requistion number. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FORCE OR ACTIVITY DESIGNATOR (F/AD) I VARIANCE REPORT

REPORT PERIOD: JANUARY 1, 1997 - MARCH 31, 1997

PART III - REQUISITION DETAIL BY DODAAC

ARMY

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

 8

 123 456 7 890123456789012 34 56789 01234567890123 4 567890 1 23 4 56 789 01 234 56 789 01234567890

DODAAC: W12345

 (In-The-Clear Activity Name NO. OF REQUISITIONS: 

Here) 150

PD 01 1

(80 column transactions here)

PD 04 119

(80 column transactions here)

PD 11 30

 (80 column transactions here)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FORCE OR ACTIVITY DESIGNATOR (F/AD) I VARIANCE REPORT

REPORT PERIOD: JANUARY 1, 1997 - MARCH 31, 1997
PART IV/V - REQUISITION STATUS SUMMARY/DETAIL 

Same as Part II/III using status transactions as source of data (requisitions would have failed edit, however

input by- passed DAASC validation, e.g., DESEX).