1. SFIS Data Elements to be Exchanged Between Trading Partners. 

a. The decision regarding Agency Accounting Identifier (AAI) to be 

included as a data element to be exchanged has been deferred. Mr. 

Shannon noted that the current definition of AAI, namely “the 

organization responsible for providing field level accounting within 

DOD,” is not consistent with several current AAI applications in use 

today such as GFEBS or Navy ERP. ACTION: Mike Shannon BTA will 

seek clarification from the SFIS Governance Board by 16 October 2009 

regarding the definition of AAI and whether it needs to be exchanged 

between SFIS trading partners.

b. Limit/Subhead is currently carried in the fund code table and is used in 

the current bill payment process. Mr. Hammond asked if Limit/Subhead 

should be included in the data exchange, so that SFIS and DLMS 

compliant systems can exchange data elements without relying on the 

fund code. Mr. Mike Shannon BTA FM, agreed that it should be carried, 

given it’s current usage. Subsequent to the meeting Mr. Hammond asked 

Mr. Doyle (OSD Comptroller Office) to clarify the difference between 

the Limit/Subhead and the SFIS data element Sub Account, and to 

confirm that inclusion of the Sub Account for SFIS compliant systems 

does not obviate the current need for Limit/Subhead. ACTION: Mr. 

Doyle will research Limit/Subhead and report back by 16 October 2009. 

2. Business Rules for Business Partner Number (BPN). Consensus was reached 

that the BPN to be exchanged is the BPN of the party to receive the bill and the 

BPN of the party to receive credit. 

3. Transactions to Carry SFIS Data. All were asked to validate the proposed 

transactions to carry SFIS data. Consensus was reached to add the 810L Logistics 

Bill. 

4. Possible Mapping SFIS Elements to DLMS X12 Qualifiers. Proposed ANSI 

X12 qualifiers for SFIS data elements for the DLMS FA2 segments are 

controlled under the Financial Management Regulation code list 529. Use of 

these qualifiers requires OSD Comptroller coordination prior to use. Mr. Mike 

Shannon, BTA FM noted this is a limitation of X12 and advised he will 

coordinate with Mr. Joe Doyle in the OSD Comptroller Office and DFAS. Mike 

noted that updating the FMR is easy enough, as opposed to asking for an X12 

update which would require another version of X12 to be used by the DoD. 

ACTION: Mr. Mike Shannon coordinate with OSD (C) and with DFAS 

regarding use of these qualifiers and report back by 16 October 2009. 

5. Methods of Exchanging SFIS Data. Three options for exchanging data were 

discussed. 
a. Option #1. - Pass delineated SFIS data elements in the required 

transactions

i. The proposed concept is to carry SFIS line of accounting (LOA) 

data plus the initiating activity’s BPN and AAI in the transaction 

that triggers a financial action. The initiating activity may be 

either the party to be billed for a purchase or the party to receive 

credit for return of previously purchased items, depending upon 

the business process. 

ii. Any SFIS data content passed in DLMS transactions will be 

adopted as “authorized DLMS enhancements.” This means that 

an SFIS-compliant application may incorporate the new data 

content at any time subsequent to the Approved Change 

implementation date without prior coordination. All DLMS 

trading partners must ensure that the inclusion of the new data 

elements will not cause currently processed transactions to fail, 

pending the receiving application’s transition to SFIS. 

iii. Mr. Cunningham went over the initial creation of data. He 

highlighted that in an ERP, the warfighter would only need to 

know his “project” and the system would generate the accounting 

data automatically. 

iv. The pros and cons of this option were discussed. Mr. Cunningham 

explained that passing delineated SFIS data allows for Financial 

data visibility at transaction level, enables ERPs to transfer funds 

directly through Treasury, utilized full capability of the ERP 

(system generated accounting data automatically), and enables 

accurate accounting for streamlined reconciliations and 

eliminations. This greatly reduces the need for customized 

enhancements (Reports, Interfaces, Conversions, and Extensions – 

RICE) to the ERPs. Mr. Cunningham acknowledged as a Con, that 

this process may not support offline ordering capabilities as they 

are currently practiced in today’s business. Offline ordering 

systems, such as eMall, GSA internet ordering, post-post and 

some tailored vendor relationship (TVR)/prime vendor DVD 

programs and processes use the Fund Code and Signal Code to 

process requisitions. These processes will have to be addressed as 

special case scenarios that require either Business Process 

Reengineering or system changes comply with SFIS 

Requirements. Reference was made to the functionality of the 

Defense Travel System (DTS) which preloads SFIS compliant 

financial data to support employee travel planning. 

v. Ms. Ellen Hilert asked if EBS is currently configured to handle the 

eight proposed SFIS data elements. Ms. Susan Eldridge noted that 

EBS is SFIS compliant and is currently configured to handle these 

data elements. 

b. Option #2 – Use of Authoritative Reference Table for LOA Data
i. Mr. Bob Hammond discussed a proposed approach of a Reference 

Table to carry SFIS LOA. DoD might be able to modify the 

current Fund Code table or create a new database with discrete 

data elements that the Buyer/Seller ERPs could link to in order to 

get this information directly based on fund code, in lieu of 

carrying LOA data in the DLMS transactions. This may solve 

many problems with buyers having to know this information. This 

enables financial visibility and more flexibility in the Interim, 

Mixed EPR/Legacy environment for the various methods of offline requisitioning to include e-Mall, GSA internet ordering, PostPost, and some tailored vendor relationship (TVR)/prime vendor 

DVD programs. In addition, systems that are not DLMS 

compliant would have access to this information. 

ii. Mr. Mike Shannon (BTA) noted that early on in the evolution of 

SFIS, this concept of a Registry or Appropriation Unique ID 

(AUID) was discussed, but voted down since the AIS and ERPs 

are being configured to pass the SFIS data. 

iii. Mr. Bob Hammond and Ms. Ellen Hilert noted that the proposed 

process #2 will be presented as an “Alternate Business Process” in 

PDC 365. 

iv. Mr. Mike Shannon (BTA) noted that this process is inconsistent 

with SFIS and the BEA. SFIS compliant system must be 

configured to send/receive the required delineated SFIS data. 

Using the fund code in place of the SFIS data would be 

inconsistent with current business decisions made by the SFIS 

Governance Board and the BEA. Mr. Cunningham asked that it 

be noted in the PDC that if the PRC chooses the Referential 

process, it will have to be staffed through and approved by the 

SFIS Governance Board. 

c. Option #3 - Use of Authoritative Reference Table for LOA Data With 

DAASC Translation.

i. Ms. Ellen Hilert noted a possible third option of DAASC 

providing an Enterprise Service, sort of a middle ground between 

the two options. In this option, DAASC would translate the fund 

code, signal code and bill-to DOAAC to pass SFIS LOA data to 

SFIS/DLMS compliant systems using the authoritative reference 

table. DAASC commented that this approach would be possible. 

ii. Mr. Mike Shannon (BTA) added this approach also is inconsistent 

with decisions already made by the SFIS Governance Board and 

the BEA. SFIS compliant system must be configured to 

send/receive the required delineated SFIS data. Using the 

Enterprise Service in place of the SFIS data would be inconsistent 

with current business decisions made by the SFIS Governance 

Board and the BEA. 

 
6. SFIS Period of Availability. Mr. Hammond discussed the current logic used in 

the fund code table for the single digit period fiscal year of the appropriation and 

inquired as to how SFIS might approach this. The appropriation associated with a 

particular fund code may contain either “#” , “*” or “x”. Essentially, these 

characters allow for a fund code to be used over and over again. The # denotes 

the fiscal year of the requisition date. The * denotes the fiscal year of the billing 

date. The “x” denotes a no year appropriation. For the process to be utilized for 

the SFIS period of availability it was noted that further analysis and discussion 

will be required. ACTION: Mr. Cunningham took an action to ask the EBS 

POC, Bruce Wright, how this was configured in DLA’s ERP. 

7. Coordination Next Steps. ACTION: Mr. Bob Hammond and Mr. John 

Garbarino will continue to finalize PDC 365 for staffing. Presentations will be 

made to the Supply PRC on 28-29 Oct 2009 and to the Finance PRC on 19 

November 2009.